Just see the other side, I'm not looking to destroy your content, I'm after a game where both sides can live and prosper with one another.
Look at NW, it wasn't even fast pased, you're putting action combat "fast paced" to solidify your arguement, I even said BDO's combat needs toning down to co-incide with group play and the trinity system.
Look at NW, it wasn't even fast pased, you're putting action combat "fast paced" to solidify your arguement, I even said BDO's combat needs toning down to co-incide with group play and the trinity system.
See, this is why I specifically said I was assuming competent developers for both.
Both games started out with just the combat system - tab vs action. As such, that is the core focus of the game.
If you are making a game where action combat is the main focus, you don't make it with a slow pace.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited June 2022
I guess I'm not sure what is meant by "a game where both sides can live with one another".
There could be a generic MMO where that is possible. I'm still highly skeptical that's possible for an MMOPRG.
Especially if the paradigm that tab-target is best for PvE and action combat is best for PvP is true.
Steven is hoping that Ashes will be a game where both tab-target and action combat coincide with having no separate PvE/RP/PvP servers. We still have to test all of that to determine how successful that will be.
WoW announced a new race, customizable dragons, crafting, and a new form of flying. None of those are pve or pvp content so by your logic, if one of those got the most "cheers," wow players don't care about pve or pvp.
Point i'm trying to make is people usually get excited for the new shinny thing which isn't always a primary gameplay loop.
Action and tab are both third person methods of controlling your character. WoW has used free aim skills to supplement their tab combat from the beginning. I think we consider them the same genre because they are the same gameplay wise. If you think it should be a new genre's then cool but I'm not sure why that matters.
What got RPG players excited about playing WoW: Dragonflight is that there is an expansion to Warcraft story and lore. There are new roles to play - new races and new classes and new abilities. We can expect new Dungeons and Raids. That's primarily PvE content. Because WoW is primarily a PvE game with some PvP added to it. And, sure, some people might be focused on new shinies.
But, for WoW, most people play on PvE servers rather than servers that have PvP.
People already think that RPing in MMORPGs is niche. But, hack and slash combat completely eradicates any RP - especially if there is PvP in that game - because then all people care about is mowing down enemies as quickly as possible and then moving on to the next combat challenge.
I think WoW using some free aim skills is irrelevant to the discussion.
I don't think anyone has argued that MMORPGs should be 100% tab-target.
I dunno what you think the percentage of action abilities are in WoW, but I think the percentage is low.
And I'm not aware of WoW having roll/dodge/block skill, like NWO.
I think a hybrid system is completly viable. I see it this way. As a front line tank or warrior, my abilities are most useful if i can use them freely on whats in front of my without needing to tab target. While what i do uave tab targeted is just what i want in the back of my mind. Like my back row healer, so his status stays front and center on my screen. Or the enemies target number 1, so when i see they are vulnerable at a glance to my tab target, i can act. While as a back row its somewhat the opposite, i have my main target tab targeted so i can focus on them and let my abilities fly without too much thought, while watching the battlefield for changes. I think a true hybrid system has its methods of making combat something interesting in its own way. And i think having a working hybrid combat system is the only way of having the best of both worlds. Interesting ingaging minor combat, where the action side of things keeps you interested. And the tab side of things so the major 1000 player battles arent so overwhelming that you cant act
And i also want to add, that alot of arguments seem to be, action is better for pvp, while tab is better for pve. And i have to say. Ashes is aiming to try and make both of these things rewarding. They are trying to be "over inclusive" as some people would say. And my opinion on this is, its not that it can not be done. Its that every game to release in the last 10 years has been more focused on the money they can make over the product they are working on. Its more a question of if intrepid is biting off more than it can chew trying to do both. Its not that both can not be done.
3
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Steven is hoping that Ashes will be a game where both tab-target and action combat coincide with having no separate PvE/RP/PvP servers. We still have to test all of that to determine how successful that will be.
If it's good enough the whole playerbase will be happy and we will appreciate each other, not seperate us into groups like we don't belong with one another...
If WoW needed RP servers my goodness....I was on a relic of an mmo called Ultima Online and it is full of just nice players, rarely an RP in sight, there isn't enough of a userbase to even warrant it
Steven is hoping that Ashes will be a game where both tab-target and action combat coincide with having no separate PvE/RP/PvP servers. We still have to test all of that to determine how successful that will be.
If it's good enough the whole playerbase will be happy and we will appreciate each other, not seperate us into groups like we don't belong with one another...
If WoW needed RP servers my goodness....I was on a relic of an mmo called Ultima Online and it is full of just nice players, rarely an RP in sight, there isn't enough of a userbase to even warrant it
Yeah, but if it's not good enough, the game will die.
So far, I see no reason to assume it will be good enough., and the more I look at the disparity between the two, the more obvious it becomes that there is no crossover in the Venn diagram of where action players are happy with an action combat game, and where tab players are happy with a tab target game.
At best - the absolute most this specific game can realistically hope for - is to appeal to people that don't really care one way or the other.
Unless, of course, Intrepid realize this in time. They have said before that if they can not get hybrid to work, they will fall back on tab target.
On the other hand, tab target is shit for PvP, but allows for more variation in PvE. Thus, a game that is tab target based us best served ignoring PvP, and focusing on PvE.
Iirc you yourself said that L2 is one of the best pvp mmos out there. And that shit is so tab that you even have to tabp the ground to move.
The combat was really fast too and knowledge of class matchups led to an advantage in a fight, so it could be argued that skill mattered in pvp, even if it wasn't necessarily mechanical (though considering the "untarget" abilities, you sometimes had to click where you opponent was quickly, otherwise you'd die in 2 hits, so that's soooomewhat mechanical?).
Is this using stevens definition of action combat? The way steven explained at some point, i cant quote. Aoe circles, and cone effects are also considered action combat. And a tab system, with cones and aoes. Aoes centered around the player, and mouse targeted aoes. Seems completly do able, and fits stevens definition of a hybrid system
On the other hand, tab target is shit for PvP, but allows for more variation in PvE. Thus, a game that is tab target based us best served ignoring PvP, and focusing on PvE.
Iirc you yourself said that L2 is one of the best pvp mmos out there. And that shit is so tab that you even have to tabp the ground to move.
The combat was really fast too and knowledge of class matchups led to an advantage in a fight, so it could be argued that skill mattered in pvp, even if it wasn't necessarily mechanical (though considering the "untarget" abilities, you sometimes had to click where you opponent was quickly, otherwise you'd die in 2 hits, so that's soooomewhat mechanical?).
I should clarify - my reasons for saying L2 is among the best PvP MMO's that have been made is not due to it's combat. It is due to the game as a whole. It gives players a means to fight, with little in terms of reason not to. Most PvP games that have followed have given players both reason and means to not fight at least some of the time.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
If it's good enough the whole playerbase will be happy and we will appreciate each other, not seperate us into groups like we don't belong with one another...
And yet it’s remained near the top of the replay list 12 years later.
I mean feel free to move the goal posts wherever you want, but there are good pve games with action combat and good pvp games with tab combat.
Combat will succeed in Ashes if it plays well and ‘feels’ solid - whether it’s action, tab, or something in between. My main concern at this point is they just decide and focus on progress.
Skyrim is entirely action combat pve and epically popular. WoW is tab and pvp is still popular there.
IMO HOW a combat system is implemented is much more important than the category of the combat system.
I love action system for bows when they are done well. Neverwinter was good action bows. ESO sucked.
Agree. Sure is a lot of sweeping generalizations and mislabeling in this thread. I don't know the numbers for sure, but I'm sure the argument could be made that WoW was and is the the mmo where the highest numbers of players pvp. Just based on it's player numbers. And it's tab. If true, or even anywhere close to true, it sure would blow completely out of the water a lot of arguments in this thread.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Skyrim is entirely action combat pve and epically popular. WoW is tab and pvp is still popular there.
IMO HOW a combat system is implemented is much more important than the category of the combat system.
I love action system for bows when they are done well. Neverwinter was good action bows. ESO sucked.
I just now took a look at Skyrim combat. Seems close to what I'd want for action combat. It's not Hack & Slash.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tyl_Uwwe5A0
I think I might want the equivalent of some of these mods to be default features for Ashes.
Target locking seems like it's a nice hybrid system instead of tab-target.
I especially like the camera rotation mods... probably more than the combat mods.
There was a small, kinda crappy game called Dungeons of Edera that almost had the exact combat feel I want for my Ranger. The attacks had enough weight and momentum, I could switch easily between a ranged and melee encounter, and use abilities on the mob I had my reticle over.
Skyrim’s archery was fantastic, but the vanilla UX to switch weapons was dreadful.
You seem to be a very selective person, I call it anti-social.
If you can't find a spec of happiness or some things to peek your interest from people without exact similar interests than you, well... ye I guess you need a game with a PvE only/RP server because I don't think your competitive at all.
Archeage and a game like Ashe's can't go RP or PvE only most likely, PvP and contest is integrated, so you'll probably be stuck with all those damn kids, and "toxic" heads like myself I guess
And yet it’s remained near the top of the replay list 12 years later.
Indeed it is. I still have it installed on my computer - still play it occasionally.
However, combat is not the draw for the game, the world is. For the last 6 or so years, it's been the mods that have been the draw for the game.
Also, did you ever try the multiplayer mode for Skyrim? Combat falls to pieces real quickly then, even if you double the HP and damage output of everything.
Never tried the multiplayer mods, but I’ll take your word for it. For 2011, combat was still pretty solid. Would have been cool to have more melee techniques, but that’s a limitation that can be over come.
Witcher 3 is another example of an action combat pve game. It does have a ‘lock target’ mechanism, but I rarely used this so combat would feel more fluid. There were a broader range of attack techniques as well.
Never tried the multiplayer mods, but I’ll take your word for it. For 2011, combat was still pretty solid. Would have been cool to have more melee techniques, but that’s a limitation that can be over come.
Witcher 3 is another example of an action combat pve game. It does have a ‘lock target’ mechanism, but I rarely used this so combat would feel more fluid. There were a broader range of attack techniques as well.
I actually never played the Witcher series (I have it ready to go as soon as I get some free time, but free time is limited).
Perhaps the point I am making here is that Skyrim combat still has the same issue I am pointing at for all action combat in MMO's.
It is fine for soloing, I would even say it is better than tab target combat. However, it falls apart when you have multiple people taking on the same encounter.
Some games manage to make it so you can have perhaps 4 or 5 on one encounter, but an MMORPG should be striving for 20 - 40, and no action combat system has ever managed that.
I dont personally believe any action combat will ever be able to achieve that, as I see the limitations that would need to apply basically removing the aspects of action combat that make it what people like about action combat (mobility being number 1).
This is why I am firmly of the belief that action combat should have it's own genre.
MMORPG's are about cooperative PvE as much as anything - it is the one aspect that is inherent to the genre that isnt really found in other genres (a handful of games, but not other genres). Since action combat is not well suited to cooperative PvE, I dont see a place for it in MMORPG's.
However, since it is great for soloing, and great for PvP, I see the potential for an entire genre there, making use of it.
In the same way as happened to strategy games (Dune 2, specifically), should this new genre ever actually be created, a number of what we currently call MMORPG's would likely be retconned in to that new genre (BDO).
Ah, I hear you. If you have time, Witcher 3 was damn near perfect as an RPG. There are only a few games that come close.
It’s a fair observation on action at scale. I never raided in ESO or Neverwinter so I’m curious to hear what folks with that experience have to say. All of my scaled raid experience is tab as a hunter & tank in WoW for 16 or so years.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
If you can't find a spec of happiness or some things to peek your interest from people without exact similar interests than you, well... ye I guess you need a game with a PvE only/RP server because I don't think your competitive at all.
Again, who cares what you guess?
MMORPGs typically support numerous playstyles. That's true even for MMORPGs with no PvP and/or minimal PvP. Also true for MMORPGs that are PvP-centric.
But, yes, if Corruption fails to deter ganking as Steven hopes and I feel Ashes is too PvP-centric. I won't play it.
I don't play games that I don't enjoy. That's OK. I don't have to play every MMORPG.
It's possible to enjoy objective-based PvP without being competitive, by the way. Especially when it's scheduled in advance, as it is for Castle and Node Sieges.
If it's good enough the whole playerbase will be happy and we will appreciate each other, not seperate us into groups like we don't belong with one another...
What makes your statement ludicrous is that it's circular logic.
Obviously, if the whole playerbase is happy, the whole playerbase is happy, so that is a meaningless statement.
Also, no, Human nature does not work such that people don't separate into groups based on what they like and don't like.
And people on opposite ends of a spectrum tend to clash when they try to play together.
People who love to explore the entirerty of a dungeon tend to clash with people who want to speed-run dungeons as quickly as possible.
Casual challenge players tend to clash with hardcore challenge players about whether to pursue the META when they are in the same group.
And people who want to enjoy the RPG features of an MMORPG are going to be highy frustrated if an MMORPG is played as if it's just a Hack & Slash where people rush from one combat to another combat as if the game is MMOFPS.
Archeage and a game like Ashe's can't go RP or PvE only most likely, PvP and contest is integrated, so you'll probably be stuck with all those damn kids, and "toxic" heads like myself I guess.
I don't think I said anything about Ashes going RP-only or PvE-only, so...
It's kind of bizarre that you mention that in reference to anything I said.
I don't think I've referred to you as toxic.
Ah, I hear you. If you have time, Witcher 3 was damn near perfect as an RPG. There are only a few games that come close.
It’s a fair observation on action at scale. I never raided in ESO or Neverwinter so I’m curious to hear what folks with that experience have to say. All of my scaled raid experience is tab as a hunter & tank in WoW for 16 or so years.
Raiding in Neverwinter works quite well, the underlying design of the game is sub-par but the better bosses are designed to counter a lot of what comes up. There isn't actually a problem with 14-20 vs the boss. However, note that this absolutely isn't what most people experience because most of these 'raids' are just regular content that can be done with 5 heavily geared players, and there is no reward for doing it with 'more weaker players'.
The mobility aspect is not usually lost either, because the design is pretty easy to develop and build on. The enemy mechanics range from 'simplistic' to 'Why are all these things happening so fast dammit?' which is the point at which most people hit the wall. Mental stack and awareness get HIGH, particularly against 'witches' and 'dragons' due to the fact that the windup/telegraphs on their attacks, even WITH the big red marker to tell you where they will be, can still leave you unable to escape the range in time depending on your group's positioning.
I really want to say:
"In short, it works exactly how you'd expect it to work."
But the more I hang around these forums the more I realize that people don't HAVE the experiences that would make them 'expect' anything in particular, so take that with the usual flagon of salt.
My first thought is that < Flagon of Salt > is a solid guild name.
That actually does sound like what I expected it might be. How does healing feel in the Neverwinter dynamic? Is is a blend of direct and AOE? Mostly ground targeting? I can’t remember if Neverwinter has a target lock (I think it does) - is that necessary in a raid setting or does the soft targeting (just reticle) work just fine?
I don't think I said anything about Ashes going RP-only or PvE-only, so...
It's kind of bizarre that you mention that in reference to anything I said.
I don't think I've referred to you as toxic.
You keep saying "I don't think I said".
I mean you don't type that many words...
You had a view, something along the lines of "I have my doubts about Ashes, especially as they aren't planning to release an RP/PvE server".
Well you might not care about what I think but I've experienced many 100's of people on a personal level in mmo's and a sub guild leader/officer and not just casual pleasant talk, I thoroughly enjoy getting to know peoples mental state : P
Your views and you got to make a lot of things like a statement is something I wouldn't have near any large social/group/alliance setting I'm involved with, anyway.
Speaking of poor memory, what was ludicrous again about my view regarding combat?...
or do you want to make up another acronym again to throw other players somewhere else so you can feel extra special that the 'mmorpg' is exclusively yours?
My first thought is that < Flagon of Salt > is a solid guild name.
That actually does sound like what I expected it might be. How does healing feel in the Neverwinter dynamic? Is is a blend of direct and AOE? Mostly ground targeting? I can’t remember if Neverwinter has a target lock (I think it does) - is that necessary in a raid setting or does the soft targeting (just reticle) work just fine?
Neverwinter healing is complicated.
Basically, there are two flaws with it. Neverwinter likes to do big damage numbers for some reason (I don't know why, given the game it is based on, but let's give them that).
As a result, Heals are often big bursts around a character, but this, in turn, does limit sensible options of mobility for a lot of people since getting players to stand and fight in formations is about as hard as you'd expect. Of course, there are good Heal Over Time options, but those are Sticky Reticle like everything else, basically.
But they made the game easier by giving a lot of Lifesteal options, after a while, so that people didn't need to work together as much. Natural convergence because... well... people are bad at that. There are big direct burst heals, but in the harder fights, doing those is complex enough that most people need a target lock. This is fine and correct, because target-lock for allied actions (where you can reasonably assume in RP terms that the person knows it is coming and aims to be 'hit' rather than avoiding) is normal enough.
So, yeah... the base is there, but the devs compensated for the player skill repeatedly as time went on. After all, who wants to spend months building content that only 10% of your playerbase will engage with in a P2W game? That's not profitable at all.
The main thing to understand based on all that, therefore, is that healing used to be challenging and require coordination at some point, but making it hard is basically engaging attrition against Healers themselves outside of tight knit friend groups, which, interestingly, is only about 30% of MMO playerbase.
There's a study about how the more you do this, the faster you bleed Healers out of your game and then of course NEED to add the lifesteal and similar, but I would take really long to find it again.
Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited June 2022
I think Neverwinter Online has a soft-lock/semi-sticky aim. IIRC.
One of the things I enjoyed while playing a Cleric is that Clerics have to deal damage to help rebuild their healing mana pool. Which means you're not just stuck healing and it does kinda feel more like a D&D Battle Cleric than the way Clerics play in typical MMORPGs.
There were some free aim heals - and it was actually kind of fun from a story perspective to try to heal a target and have someone else accidently run between you and soak that heal. Flaws and failing can be part of the fun of a great adventure.
I also liked using AoE heals. Both kinda help make it feel like a reflection of playing a Cleric in Table Top D&D.
And, Roll/Dodge/Block were pretty fun action combat features.
IIRC, there was some ground telegraphs in the game, but it wasn't crazy chaotic, like Wildstar.
I don't really recall ground telegraphs for Cleric heals. Seems like the heal AoEs were more burst rather than being static enough to need a ground telegraph, but it's been almost a decade since I played. I burned out right after the release of the first expansion.
And I've basically been waiting for something like the Node system ever since.
Oye. Complicated seems an appropriate descriptor. The hardest part being the low population and P2W being in conflict with the dogged nature of raiding. Giving self-heals in the form of life steals reminds me of what WoW did when the game shifted hard toward solo casuals.
Sounds like a low threshold for healers to bail out for other games.
That said …
If you set the p2w, low pop, and big damage aside - did the action underpinnings work at scale for healers or is it much more favorable to dps / tanks?
Oye. Complicated seems an appropriate descriptor. The hardest part being the low population and P2W being in conflict with the dogged nature of raiding. Giving self-heals in the form of life steals reminds me of what WoW did when the game shifted hard toward solo casuals.
Sounds like a low threshold for healers to bail out for other games.
That said …
If you set the p2w, low pop, and big damage aside - did the action underpinnings work at scale for healers or is it much more favorable to dps / tanks?
The Action used for Healers is explicitly designed in NWO to mimic Tab Target healing EFFECTIVENESS without coming out exactly the same way.
In fact, almost all healing works like this in MMORPGs of the last few years, with only two Innovative methods that I am aware of. I personally consider the innovative ones to be better suited for Action MMOs. So, from the perspective of 'could a player who is used to healing in a Tab Target game effectively act as a healer here while still experiencing some Action', the answer is yes.
From the perspective of 'could this have been done better or in a way more suited to improving the gameplay from the Action perspective', the answer is 'very yes'. That said, I think it's usually better for games to make healing 'easy and similar to tab target' since adding mechanical skill to healing is a barrier to entry for a reasonably large portion of the healerbase.
People already struggle with targeting and healing allies with Tab Target, particularly in mobility situations where they must get out of central attack cones/blast radii.
Comments
"tab is shit for pvp".
So that's a massive flaw right? "WRONG!"
Just see the other side, I'm not looking to destroy your content, I'm after a game where both sides can live and prosper with one another.
Look at NW, it wasn't even fast pased, you're putting action combat "fast paced" to solidify your arguement, I even said BDO's combat needs toning down to co-incide with group play and the trinity system.
Both games started out with just the combat system - tab vs action. As such, that is the core focus of the game.
If you are making a game where action combat is the main focus, you don't make it with a slow pace.
There could be a generic MMO where that is possible. I'm still highly skeptical that's possible for an MMOPRG.
Especially if the paradigm that tab-target is best for PvE and action combat is best for PvP is true.
Steven is hoping that Ashes will be a game where both tab-target and action combat coincide with having no separate PvE/RP/PvP servers. We still have to test all of that to determine how successful that will be.
What got RPG players excited about playing WoW: Dragonflight is that there is an expansion to Warcraft story and lore. There are new roles to play - new races and new classes and new abilities. We can expect new Dungeons and Raids. That's primarily PvE content. Because WoW is primarily a PvE game with some PvP added to it. And, sure, some people might be focused on new shinies.
But, for WoW, most people play on PvE servers rather than servers that have PvP.
People already think that RPing in MMORPGs is niche. But, hack and slash combat completely eradicates any RP - especially if there is PvP in that game - because then all people care about is mowing down enemies as quickly as possible and then moving on to the next combat challenge.
I think WoW using some free aim skills is irrelevant to the discussion.
I don't think anyone has argued that MMORPGs should be 100% tab-target.
I dunno what you think the percentage of action abilities are in WoW, but I think the percentage is low.
And I'm not aware of WoW having roll/dodge/block skill, like NWO.
And i also want to add, that alot of arguments seem to be, action is better for pvp, while tab is better for pve. And i have to say. Ashes is aiming to try and make both of these things rewarding. They are trying to be "over inclusive" as some people would say. And my opinion on this is, its not that it can not be done. Its that every game to release in the last 10 years has been more focused on the money they can make over the product they are working on. Its more a question of if intrepid is biting off more than it can chew trying to do both. Its not that both can not be done.
If it's good enough the whole playerbase will be happy and we will appreciate each other, not seperate us into groups like we don't belong with one another...
If WoW needed RP servers my goodness....I was on a relic of an mmo called Ultima Online and it is full of just nice players, rarely an RP in sight, there isn't enough of a userbase to even warrant it
So far, I see no reason to assume it will be good enough., and the more I look at the disparity between the two, the more obvious it becomes that there is no crossover in the Venn diagram of where action players are happy with an action combat game, and where tab players are happy with a tab target game.
At best - the absolute most this specific game can realistically hope for - is to appeal to people that don't really care one way or the other.
Unless, of course, Intrepid realize this in time. They have said before that if they can not get hybrid to work, they will fall back on tab target.
The combat was really fast too and knowledge of class matchups led to an advantage in a fight, so it could be argued that skill mattered in pvp, even if it wasn't necessarily mechanical (though considering the "untarget" abilities, you sometimes had to click where you opponent was quickly, otherwise you'd die in 2 hits, so that's soooomewhat mechanical?).
I should clarify - my reasons for saying L2 is among the best PvP MMO's that have been made is not due to it's combat. It is due to the game as a whole. It gives players a means to fight, with little in terms of reason not to. Most PvP games that have followed have given players both reason and means to not fight at least some of the time.
IMO HOW a combat system is implemented is much more important than the category of the combat system.
I love action system for bows when they are done well. Neverwinter was good action bows. ESO sucked.
If anything, that is the aspect of the game that has recieves the most criticism.
I mean feel free to move the goal posts wherever you want, but there are good pve games with action combat and good pvp games with tab combat.
Combat will succeed in Ashes if it plays well and ‘feels’ solid - whether it’s action, tab, or something in between. My main concern at this point is they just decide and focus on progress.
Agree. Sure is a lot of sweeping generalizations and mislabeling in this thread. I don't know the numbers for sure, but I'm sure the argument could be made that WoW was and is the the mmo where the highest numbers of players pvp. Just based on it's player numbers. And it's tab. If true, or even anywhere close to true, it sure would blow completely out of the water a lot of arguments in this thread.
I think I might want the equivalent of some of these mods to be default features for Ashes.
Target locking seems like it's a nice hybrid system instead of tab-target.
I especially like the camera rotation mods... probably more than the combat mods.
Skyrim’s archery was fantastic, but the vanilla UX to switch weapons was dreadful.
You seem to be a very selective person, I call it anti-social.
If you can't find a spec of happiness or some things to peek your interest from people without exact similar interests than you, well... ye I guess you need a game with a PvE only/RP server because I don't think your competitive at all.
Archeage and a game like Ashe's can't go RP or PvE only most likely, PvP and contest is integrated, so you'll probably be stuck with all those damn kids, and "toxic" heads like myself I guess
Indeed it is. I still have it installed on my computer - still play it occasionally.
However, combat is not the draw for the game, the world is. For the last 6 or so years, it's been the mods that have been the draw for the game.
Also, did you ever try the multiplayer mode for Skyrim? Combat falls to pieces real quickly then, even if you double the HP and damage output of everything.
Witcher 3 is another example of an action combat pve game. It does have a ‘lock target’ mechanism, but I rarely used this so combat would feel more fluid. There were a broader range of attack techniques as well.
I actually never played the Witcher series (I have it ready to go as soon as I get some free time, but free time is limited).
Perhaps the point I am making here is that Skyrim combat still has the same issue I am pointing at for all action combat in MMO's.
It is fine for soloing, I would even say it is better than tab target combat. However, it falls apart when you have multiple people taking on the same encounter.
Some games manage to make it so you can have perhaps 4 or 5 on one encounter, but an MMORPG should be striving for 20 - 40, and no action combat system has ever managed that.
I dont personally believe any action combat will ever be able to achieve that, as I see the limitations that would need to apply basically removing the aspects of action combat that make it what people like about action combat (mobility being number 1).
This is why I am firmly of the belief that action combat should have it's own genre.
MMORPG's are about cooperative PvE as much as anything - it is the one aspect that is inherent to the genre that isnt really found in other genres (a handful of games, but not other genres). Since action combat is not well suited to cooperative PvE, I dont see a place for it in MMORPG's.
However, since it is great for soloing, and great for PvP, I see the potential for an entire genre there, making use of it.
In the same way as happened to strategy games (Dune 2, specifically), should this new genre ever actually be created, a number of what we currently call MMORPG's would likely be retconned in to that new genre (BDO).
It’s a fair observation on action at scale. I never raided in ESO or Neverwinter so I’m curious to hear what folks with that experience have to say. All of my scaled raid experience is tab as a hunter & tank in WoW for 16 or so years.
Again, who cares what you guess?
MMORPGs typically support numerous playstyles. That's true even for MMORPGs with no PvP and/or minimal PvP. Also true for MMORPGs that are PvP-centric.
But, yes, if Corruption fails to deter ganking as Steven hopes and I feel Ashes is too PvP-centric. I won't play it.
I don't play games that I don't enjoy. That's OK. I don't have to play every MMORPG.
It's possible to enjoy objective-based PvP without being competitive, by the way. Especially when it's scheduled in advance, as it is for Castle and Node Sieges.
What makes your statement ludicrous is that it's circular logic.
Obviously, if the whole playerbase is happy, the whole playerbase is happy, so that is a meaningless statement.
Also, no, Human nature does not work such that people don't separate into groups based on what they like and don't like.
And people on opposite ends of a spectrum tend to clash when they try to play together.
People who love to explore the entirerty of a dungeon tend to clash with people who want to speed-run dungeons as quickly as possible.
Casual challenge players tend to clash with hardcore challenge players about whether to pursue the META when they are in the same group.
And people who want to enjoy the RPG features of an MMORPG are going to be highy frustrated if an MMORPG is played as if it's just a Hack & Slash where people rush from one combat to another combat as if the game is MMOFPS.
I don't think I said anything about Ashes going RP-only or PvE-only, so...
It's kind of bizarre that you mention that in reference to anything I said.
I don't think I've referred to you as toxic.
Raiding in Neverwinter works quite well, the underlying design of the game is sub-par but the better bosses are designed to counter a lot of what comes up. There isn't actually a problem with 14-20 vs the boss. However, note that this absolutely isn't what most people experience because most of these 'raids' are just regular content that can be done with 5 heavily geared players, and there is no reward for doing it with 'more weaker players'.
The mobility aspect is not usually lost either, because the design is pretty easy to develop and build on. The enemy mechanics range from 'simplistic' to 'Why are all these things happening so fast dammit?' which is the point at which most people hit the wall. Mental stack and awareness get HIGH, particularly against 'witches' and 'dragons' due to the fact that the windup/telegraphs on their attacks, even WITH the big red marker to tell you where they will be, can still leave you unable to escape the range in time depending on your group's positioning.
I really want to say:
"In short, it works exactly how you'd expect it to work."
But the more I hang around these forums the more I realize that people don't HAVE the experiences that would make them 'expect' anything in particular, so take that with the usual flagon of salt.
That actually does sound like what I expected it might be. How does healing feel in the Neverwinter dynamic? Is is a blend of direct and AOE? Mostly ground targeting? I can’t remember if Neverwinter has a target lock (I think it does) - is that necessary in a raid setting or does the soft targeting (just reticle) work just fine?
You keep saying "I don't think I said".
I mean you don't type that many words...
You had a view, something along the lines of "I have my doubts about Ashes, especially as they aren't planning to release an RP/PvE server".
Well you might not care about what I think but I've experienced many 100's of people on a personal level in mmo's and a sub guild leader/officer and not just casual pleasant talk, I thoroughly enjoy getting to know peoples mental state : P
Your views and you got to make a lot of things like a statement is something I wouldn't have near any large social/group/alliance setting I'm involved with, anyway.
Speaking of poor memory, what was ludicrous again about my view regarding combat?...
or do you want to make up another acronym again to throw other players somewhere else so you can feel extra special that the 'mmorpg' is exclusively yours?
Neverwinter healing is complicated.
Basically, there are two flaws with it. Neverwinter likes to do big damage numbers for some reason (I don't know why, given the game it is based on, but let's give them that).
As a result, Heals are often big bursts around a character, but this, in turn, does limit sensible options of mobility for a lot of people since getting players to stand and fight in formations is about as hard as you'd expect. Of course, there are good Heal Over Time options, but those are Sticky Reticle like everything else, basically.
But they made the game easier by giving a lot of Lifesteal options, after a while, so that people didn't need to work together as much. Natural convergence because... well... people are bad at that. There are big direct burst heals, but in the harder fights, doing those is complex enough that most people need a target lock. This is fine and correct, because target-lock for allied actions (where you can reasonably assume in RP terms that the person knows it is coming and aims to be 'hit' rather than avoiding) is normal enough.
So, yeah... the base is there, but the devs compensated for the player skill repeatedly as time went on. After all, who wants to spend months building content that only 10% of your playerbase will engage with in a P2W game? That's not profitable at all.
The main thing to understand based on all that, therefore, is that healing used to be challenging and require coordination at some point, but making it hard is basically engaging attrition against Healers themselves outside of tight knit friend groups, which, interestingly, is only about 30% of MMO playerbase.
There's a study about how the more you do this, the faster you bleed Healers out of your game and then of course NEED to add the lifesteal and similar, but I would take really long to find it again.
One of the things I enjoyed while playing a Cleric is that Clerics have to deal damage to help rebuild their healing mana pool. Which means you're not just stuck healing and it does kinda feel more like a D&D Battle Cleric than the way Clerics play in typical MMORPGs.
There were some free aim heals - and it was actually kind of fun from a story perspective to try to heal a target and have someone else accidently run between you and soak that heal. Flaws and failing can be part of the fun of a great adventure.
I also liked using AoE heals. Both kinda help make it feel like a reflection of playing a Cleric in Table Top D&D.
And, Roll/Dodge/Block were pretty fun action combat features.
IIRC, there was some ground telegraphs in the game, but it wasn't crazy chaotic, like Wildstar.
I don't really recall ground telegraphs for Cleric heals. Seems like the heal AoEs were more burst rather than being static enough to need a ground telegraph, but it's been almost a decade since I played. I burned out right after the release of the first expansion.
And I've basically been waiting for something like the Node system ever since.
Sounds like a low threshold for healers to bail out for other games.
That said …
If you set the p2w, low pop, and big damage aside - did the action underpinnings work at scale for healers or is it much more favorable to dps / tanks?
The Action used for Healers is explicitly designed in NWO to mimic Tab Target healing EFFECTIVENESS without coming out exactly the same way.
In fact, almost all healing works like this in MMORPGs of the last few years, with only two Innovative methods that I am aware of. I personally consider the innovative ones to be better suited for Action MMOs. So, from the perspective of 'could a player who is used to healing in a Tab Target game effectively act as a healer here while still experiencing some Action', the answer is yes.
From the perspective of 'could this have been done better or in a way more suited to improving the gameplay from the Action perspective', the answer is 'very yes'. That said, I think it's usually better for games to make healing 'easy and similar to tab target' since adding mechanical skill to healing is a barrier to entry for a reasonably large portion of the healerbase.
People already struggle with targeting and healing allies with Tab Target, particularly in mobility situations where they must get out of central attack cones/blast radii.