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.
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.
Comments
All the limitations I see imposed here come from little experience with action combat or not understanding if theres a problem there is a solution.
In fact, action combat is literally tab-target without the tab-target limitations.
the funny thing is....
it's been going for at least a good solid year lol. new threads, same discussions
The thing is, you need to take the content in to account as well - a discussion about JUST the combat system is stupid.
In terms of content, when combined with a combat system, developers can (and usually do, in most games) create situations where players are at 100% engagement.
In an action combat game, most of this is applied via the combat system. In a tab target game, most of it is applied via the encounters.
What this means is that it is blatantly inherent that tab target games will inherently have greater variety of encounters.
That is my entire argument, and literally no one has ever come up with a point that even remotely argues against this.
Fact is, if we assume that developers are aiming for 100% engagement (and won't go over that), then the simpler the combat system is, the more of that engagement can be put on the encounters. The more of the engagement put on the encounters, the more variation those encounters can have from each other.
So yes, generally speaking, action combat requires a little more from players (not a lot more, and tab target doesn't require no skill as many people have suggested 0 nd this is a generalization and not a rule). However, it is this extra that action combat requires from players that is it's downfall on top end PvE content.
huh? In context to the MMORPG that ashes is aiming for, the combat system is directly involved with the encounters mechanics. Depending on the system and its abilities, you can have the same level of engagement regardless of which system, especially with their reticle tab target system the way it currently is aimed to be.
I understand what you're trying to imply but it doesn't take a dive (downfall) on top-end PvE. I can see how collision may play a role but player positioning and combat systems still work relatively the same with the phases of a boss fight.
Based on what we have seen with the bare bones for the encounters in early development, I honestly dont understand how one could come to that conclusion but please feel free to elaborate on this
I'm talking more generalizations than anything Ashes specific.
My thoughts on how it will relate specifically to Ashes are that if the game has encounters that are anything even remotely compared to top end encounters in the few games that I consider to have them, then players will need to spec more tab target than action.
I also expect players that are soloing or expecting PvP to spec mostly action.
What I don't expect is for people to put a whole lot of thought in to this - the above will just be what people consider the best specs for each content type to be.
oh ok!
I will still have to disagree on the TT vs AC but in context to AoC, depending on abilities, I may end up using the reticle locking system during encounters, utilise the tools available to you. Players are still going to have to overcome the mechanics in order to achieve victory in the encounters. Going off the dragon examples, there is things to dodge/avoid, soak, damage mitigate etc (the list of encounter mechanics can go on and on).
Good thing they're going with the reticle, it can tie the encounters to be engaging and challenging without necessarily being a same street different name kind of thing. Hopefully they add enough non predictable chaos into the mix to make it fun instead of a rinse and repeat type encounter. Considering how a majority of the encounters for PvE content such as raids are aimed to be open-world vs instanced, it's going to be quite interesting.
So, if those dragon fights are anything to go by, they have lots of potential for engaging encounters regardless of the TT vs AC features we currently are aware of. With the potential for increased difficulties, those abilities would also evolve and/or additional abilities and mechanics.
To me, the encounters displayed in those encounters are the base level building blocks of an encounter. The are the equivalent of what you get in your class kit in the first 10 levels of a game - you still have the abilities from the remaining 40 levels that is where all the interest and uniqueness of your class is to be found.
If what we have seen so far is representative of what will be in game, then not only will action vs tab not matter, but the content itself won't even matter. The encounters as shown so far are boring, lacking flavor and lacking uniqueness.
However, at this point in development, I don't expect any raid encounters to be finished - which is why I am assuming they are placeholders right now.
If the game does indeed have the raid encounters that I am hoping, it may well be impossible to use action combat with them. I mean, one of the things that is key in a good number of raid encounters that stand out to me is the ability to be attacking in one direction, but looking in another direction (keeping an eye out for any number of things). This is straight up not possible with action combat.
Even without that, if the encounters have as much going on as I would expect, you likely won't have the time in combat to deal with what you need to deal with, as well as dealing with having to aim your abilities and use the appropriate abilities at the appropriate time (which is not necessarily something that only affects your performance - it can affect the entire raid).
On the other hand, the game could have stripped down, dumbed down raid encounters like BDO or Archeage.
of course, It's just the bare bones for both players and boss encounters per se.
True, in most cases the camera manipulation to get a 360 scope of your surroundings is a bit more difficult for the AC side of things for those who are not used to that sort of things but a counter to that could be that it also add an element of surprise if you are not paying attention with your spatial awareness. But with the ability to zoom out, you can probably get a good view regardless of positioning of the camera such as crane operator views, so this leads me to believe that it's not necessarily going to be case as that's more of a direct issue with camera positioning. In a more first person sense, I can definitely see the issue the direct comparison but other factors also play a roll in that such as the stage for the encounter, how open the area is etc.
But as mentioned, good thing they have toggle for the reticle aiming so players can switch during the encounter if need be as perhaps certain mechanics may require both style of players to utilise one and the other at some point. I can definitely see the higher end difficulty maybe being more demanding of this in certain scenarios compared to more lower difficulty and forgiving mechanics.
I can see it being a bit more of a situational thing for range, but melee could be quite more forgivable with the camera situation and aiming in comparison as the examples of combat have shown so far in recent videos relatively but not too in-depth for. Definitely something to consider, and if the camera adjusting feature is something simple like holding a button down and using your mouse without changing your characters reticle placement, could be minimal issues especially with mobility and dodge.
All that is needed is for Steven to want to have that in the game. They have the developers on hand to create it, and potentially the combat system (again, my assertion that action combat is not suited to top end content due to it's lack of variety isn't a comment on Ashes - because Ashes will have tab combat as well).
While I can easily come up with situations in which tab is required over action (needing to keep an eye on something happening at the back of a room, for example), I can't currently think of any encounter mechanics that would require action over tab - however, I have literally no doubts at all that they would exist (perhaps a mob that de-targets tab target abilities every few seconds - though this seems a little corny to me).
Regardless, the need to switch between action and tab mid encounter - assuming the encounter has everything else going on that top end encounters have going on - could make for some awesome and unique encounters.
Exactly, as an example (not a suggestion):
maybe range has to target certain parts of the boss, environment/stage while melee handles another mechanic and vice versa. Have the boss mechanics not only evolve, but the stage/environment interactions as well. It could require target and/or free aim depending on design of the encounter which could require dodging certain things at the same time. Damage a wall to cave in part of the stage or allow lava to flow through. Intrepid has plenty of room for potential in things like this with their combat system and potential boss mechanics.
Just an idea for an example, dont over think it or judge it lol
Im genuinely curious what type of encounters you think are possible in tab target games that arent possible in action combat games.
And how those encounters are superior to the possible encounters action combat can offer.
Personally ill admit i have limited raiding experience, WoW and FFXIV being the only games i raided in. I fail to see any encounter they have that cant be done in action combat, and even if there is, how there isnt a way that action combat can actually improve that encounter by having more dynamic combat and less reliance on UI.
Some abstractions for you. Imagine you have 10 units of "engagement", and a game developer wants to use all 10 of them for top end content. Obviously, a combination of encounter + combat system cant equal more than 10 engagement, as no player has more than 10 (and indeed many have less).
Action combat uses 7 of your engagement to just work the combat system. Tab target takes 4. This is basically the argument action players have that action combat takes "more" than tab (an argument I am not disagreeing with as a generalization).
This means that a developer creating an encounter for action only has 3 engagement left to use on that encounter, while that tab developer has 6 engagement to use.
As such, any encounter in which the sum total of mechanics would equal more than 3 but not more than 6 is an encounter which is suitable for tab, but not action.
What is straight up not possible is to argue all of the three following points.
1, developers can make content that requires too much from players due to an overload of mechanics (but they generally try to avoid this).
2, action combat requires more from players than tab target combat.
3, action combat can have the same intricacy and complexity of encounters as tab target.
Any two of these statements can be true at the same time, but all three simply can not be. It is a logical impossibility.
Now, I have seen tab target encounters that were unable to be killed due to mechanics (raids could spend an hour on one pull, not die, but not get the mob below 90%), so the first of these is 100% true.
This either the second or third point needs to be false.
If you want to argue that action combat does not require more from players than tab, have at it. You will likely be alone in that arguement though.
This only leaves the last comment to be false.
If you disagree with this logical reasoning, feel free to point out where you think the logic has fallen down.
You still have an extra step in your scenario since the player needs to deselect their target to get a new one each time they use a melee skill. If the system automatically does that for you then you get something like a softlock system (ESO/NW) which is considered free aim.
Yes, a placed skill is a free aim skill. It is not tab. Most games we call tab could be considered hybrid as they do use none tab skills.
Back to this again, lmao. This is false, this is why he goes on in the other post talking about engagement because lack of actual examples that are realistic.
If there is a mech that happens behind you out of sight you know the timing of the mech and you do it when it pops up. If you don't know the mechs you keep your eye out as you fight until looking for things to notice. Just because yo can't focus on more then one thing or have difficulty with it is not the same for other people. I can't imagine if I played shooters and couldn't deal with someone behind me and and turn on them and react instantly lol. People are not limited to your idea of math, and design can work around that as well.
Again you can't give proper examples you talk about generalization to avoid giving actual factual examples because you are unable to do it. And then you say things like action will have to use tab, and you 100% would be part of that toxic group to kick people if they are not using what you want because of your own false assumptions.
Would pk 10/10
Says it all.
Enjoy whatever game you end up playing, OP.
They are smart, you see, and if they want a mechanic that you cant time, they will simply make it so this mechanic can happen anywhere from 5 seconds to 5 minutes after it happened the last time.
Honestly, almost any mechanic that you can time is fairly easy to overcome.
Look at the spreadsheet culture of World of Warcraft for a huge example. When you remove a lot of the skill components found in action combat, you get people min/maxing hardcore and demanding certain things from players as requirements that have nothing to do with skill. It removes a lot of the enjoyment out of the combat. You see it a lot in the recruitment of players whether it's for guilds or pug groups for raids/mythic+, skill is never a factor, only visible numbers. I absolute hate that.
Going full tab target will be a big mistake. Action can work, and should be utilized.
Which is why the dev expectation is that each playstyle will go 80/20.
Because they want to; not because they need to.
I hear pantheon is accepting 10,000$ pledges if you don't want hybrid/ deal with fighting action players. -insert meme laugh-
You don't want to aim your abilities or be required to dodge so you can focus on what you think matters? If you don't have to actively participate in the combat and move and react based on what's happening in your combat, what are you focusing on? Do you mean like watching HP bars and damage numbers and just running numbers in your head while you press 1 2 3 and tab around? I'm confused by what you mean when you say "focus on what matters..." Why don't you want to have to aim your abilities? Do not you think it's more engaging if you're going to swing a giant sword or throw a giant fireball if you actually have to throw it with some intention because you want to hit something and do damage? It making you feel more connected to the combat and making the actions in the game feel more connected to your inputs and giving you more control over how/where/when you use your skills; I'm confused as to why having to aim is taking away from your enjoyment. There are tons of other mmos where you can tab around and just smack 1-5 on your keyboard without even looking and just wait for your cooldowns, this game isn't that....
Also it's hybrid it's not full action combat
People say how BDO's combat is great and fluid, but I just can't see it. To me it's the opposite of fluid. You are constantly animation-locked, it just doesn't look or feel fluid, rather it feels clunky. It looks great, but it also looks and feels too spammy and flashy. Remember this, as I'll come back to it later.
Others have mentioned this, and I'll add my thoughts as well. Action combat can and often does feel good to play, BUT... not all the time.
Lost Ark is another great example. I liked the combat in solo PvE setting, even in raids (since there were only 8 people as far as I can remember), but I absolutely DESPISED the combat in PvP. Animation locks, constant CC and stagger, being juggled in the air like I'm playing Tekken or some other fighter game (idk I don't play these games). Overall it was an awful experience in PvP, even after learning the mechanics. It just wasn't fun to play.
In raids that have a larger number of people (which AoC will have), as well as in large scale PvP (which AoC will also have), I just don't see full-on action combat working (and thankfully the game wont go in that direction).
Action combat has its place, but for me its place is in single-player games, games that you play casually for an hour or 2 max or competitive games that have matches, rather than continuous open-world experience ( games like LoL, CS:GO, etc.). To me, MMORPGs were always more relaxing games. If I wanted action and thrill, I'd jump on some shooters or MOBAs. Remember when I said it's too spammy and flashy? That exactly adds to that thrill and action feel, but you can't constantly have that for long periods of time. There's time and place for that, and that would be PvP or even Raids, but in general open-world content it's just too mentally taxing to constantly dodge and aim abilities on top of those abilities being spammy and flashy. MMORPGs also generally have an older audience compared to those games. You can't expect everyone to have perfect reflexes, to dodge everything perfectly, etc. Tab-targeting is simply more accessible to a wider-audience, it's more relaxing to play (doesn't mean it's boring).
Also, gear should matter, it should change what you can and cannot do, not just to be a cosmetic thing that only adds power to your character.
In GW2, there's almost no tanking, instead you are required to dodge stuff constantly. There is an option to select tanky stats, but you are useless in that case, and you'll still die if you don't dodge. There's a reason more action combat oriented games have moved away from the holy trinity, as implementing some of the roles (tanks and healers) isn't that easy or possible (correct me if I'm wrong) to do.
Games like BDO or Lost Ark don't have tanks or the trinity of DPS. Healer, Tank. If they had tanks, you'd either make them so tanky that they could ignore mechanics, or they would still need to dodge everything which would kinda ruin the purpose of having a tank (bosses would move all over the place, are you really a tank if you can't actually get hit by stuff, etc.). Same thing with Healers, why would you dodge stuff if you can just rely on your healer keeping you at 100% HP. That's the reason why those roles usually don't work in action-combat games, as they would make you ignore a part of the combat system (dodging, avoiding attacks).
In tab-target games, encounters are specifically designed around having a tank, dps and a healer. You need a tank to keep the aggro and take the hits (that DPS or Healers just wouldn't be able to take). You need Healer(s) to keep the tank, and the whole group alive. You need DPS to do damage, because Tanks and Healers don't do much. This is such a core part of the MMORPG genre, that I feel is missing in most full on action-combat games, so when the OP said "It takes the focus away from the rpg aspects", I can definitely see where they're coming from.
One of the main arguments against tab-target combat is that it's boring. That's probably true for a lot of games, and it's not true at all for a lot of games. It's 2022, and most of the tab-target games that people have experienced were released 10+ years ago. There's no reason why they can't develop a great, unique and fun tab-targeting game.
Archeage had tab-targeting, but it wasn't boring at all due to having different combos among other things.
Tab-targeting games also absolutely do require skill to play, so to suggest otherwise would be...not smart. They just require different type of skill.
If the game is "boring" or if you feel that action-combat requires more skill than tab-target, it's probably due to the game's implementation of the combat, not due to tab-target itself.
I don't want to make this post any longer, but there were a lot of comments and arguments I wanted to reply to, but decided not to as it would take too long. Overall I'm optimistic about the direction of the combat in Ashes of Creation.
Being animation-locked or other movement penalties during skills is what makes combat feel grounded and immersive, when theres no movement restrictions you end with an unsatisfying floaty mess like ESO.
The fluidity of BDO comes from their combo systems, skills flow nicely one after the other, if you dont feel that way when playing, then I dont know what fluidity means to you.
I don't think this is true at all, I mean, it is true if we are talking about experienced MMO players that have used tab-targeting for ages.
But if we are presenting the genre to new players (which this genre desperately needs) then I dont think tab-target is that accessible.
People aren't used to tab-targeting, barely any other genre has tab-target, people are playing FPS, fighters, mobas, etc, which are much closer to action combat than tab-target.
Picking up an MMORPG for the first time 20 years ago with tab-target was amazing for its time, there were barely any standards, etc
But picking an MMORPG for the first time today, after having played so many other games, i think tab-target would feel underwhelming for most people.
It seems to be the case that implementing the trinity is hard, however it has been done successfully before. There are a couple of examples, but the best one would be Tera. Essentially, in terms of toolkits tanks and healers have pretty much everything your regular tab-target games have. For tanks, the damage mitigation, the aggro, cc, etc. For healers, well, heals, cleansing, buffs, debuffs, resurrects, etc.
Then it adds action combat elements on top, for tank, active block and dodge rolls. For healers there was a target lock system for some heals and certain specific spells, the target lock system allowed you to press a skill and lock it to a target by aiming at them.
For me that was the best implementation of the trinity system in action combat.
I feel like the exact same type of argument can be done with action-combat.
High end combat you know your cancels in bdo which helps with animation lock. Though not all skills you cna stop and animation are part that limit you from spamming as much. Its fluid in giving you movement and linking your attacks.
The most fluid combat of any game I have ever played is as a rogue type in EQ2. You have to time your abilities between your auto attack swings - which in many cases were going off ever half second.
As such, you have to get yourself in to a specific rhythm in order to be effective. Timing your abilities with precision, but maintaining both position and facing.
In terms of feeling fluid, nothing has ever come close.
Thing is, it looks clunky.
BDO is the opposite. It looks fluid, but it feels clunky.
Many of the arguments for action combat are indeed arguments with how it looks, not how it plays. Fluidity of combat in action games is purely about how they look, as if the argument were how they play, there is no inherent difference - it's just how each is implemented (and tab target has a better implementation of it than action as far as I have found).
I don't think this is a valid point at all.
When players come to a new genre, they expect new gameplay.
If they move to an MMO, and the combat plays basically the same as their favorite BR, they would have every right to ask why even bother with this new genre at all - since combat is the main system by which they will interact with the game.
I mean, if I was playing a game that I enjoyed, and someone asked me to try a different genre that I had never played before, if the gameplay was basically the same I would just go back to the game I was already happy playing. This is very true, and is kind of what I have been saying for a while.
While tab and action combat are different, the actual implementation of each is more important than which one was implemented.
People say things like "tab is slow", but Tera was slow as well. Then people say "yeah, but BDO wasn't, it was fast", but then so was EQ2. But action combat requires more accuracy, just look at Darkfall - or look at ESO to see that it doesn't. But Action requires accuracy - look at Darkfall - yet neither ESO, BDO or Tera require all that much accuracy, and indeed they require less accuracy than EQ2 requires (at times).
The arguments about this are all just stupid, and are why I have always tried to talk about generalizations. As a generalization, action combat does indeed need more accuracy than tab, it is indeed generally faster, but it doesn't require as much thought in relation to using the correct ability. All of these generalizations can have exceptions (which are why they are generalizations), but they all still hold true.
Or maybe we just have a toasted butter sandwich?
Tab target combat is not fluid you just press a button there isn't any control its clunky, piano playing or has no feeling to it. You are waiting on world cooldowns and attacking every second when the cooldown is up on general abilities , that is not being fluid. And you are picking one of the worst ones as being "fluid" out of all tab target games.
I highly doubt you played bdo enough to learn the combat and get a feel for it. Bdo has extremely fluid combat but there is a learning curve. If you aren't learning pvp and actively doing it you aren't going to be pushed to learn the game in a way you need to improve.
Please stop saying its just how they look, that is true for tab not action. If you do a movement skill in a action mmo you can dodge the attack, if you do a movement skill in a tab game and they are mid slash or shooting you its going to hit. You don't understand action combat is all I'm seeing and you are speaking as if its fact.
Generalizations mean nothing it just shows a lack of experience or unwillingly ness to provide facts and simply rely on what you think or feel.
You are making my heard hurt you are just being a nostalgia bot for eq2. It doesn't mater how much you like it at the time it was fine a great, but in this current age EQ combat is complete garbage.
This kind combat is boring its not fluid its akin to a freaking turn based rpg.