Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Concern Regarding Dodge As A Mobility Tool
Blindside
Member
If dodges can be used to create distance, this creates issues in PvP. Assuming they are low cooldown (~10s recharge, potentially lower than movement/movement impairing abilities), the only way to keep up with a player who is dodging away would be to dodge after them.
To explain further:
___
Also, small note, the stop-and-go animation of the dodge shown below (timestamp is 18:03) can cause motion sickness very easily. It would be preferable if the dodge roll retained a smooth camera motion identical to the base movement speed. The shoulder charge dodge doesn't seem to have as jarring of an effect, but the movement both dodges travel relative to the animation time is still a concern I have.
https://youtu.be/GjEP4P5vDZI?t=1083
To explain further:
- [GOOD] If player characters' base movement speed allows them to move 1 meter per second, a dodge that lasts .75s should travel .75 meters during the animation. This prevents the dodge from being used as an escape tool, and shifts the focus of creating/closing distance back to your character's unique abilities. This would prevent dodging from being a universal, get out of jail free movement tool that just gets spammed any time your character is in danger.
- [BAD] On the contrary, if player characters' base movement speed allows them to move 1 meter per second, a dodge that lasts .75s but travels 1 meter (or any number higher than .75 meters) during the animation begins to create distance each time the dodge is used. This becomes an issue because the need for proper timing is eliminated when the dodge can frequently put you out of reach of your enemies regardless of whether you skillfully evaded an important attack or not. Ranged characters will not have much issue with this, but it becomes a big issue for melee combat.
___
Also, small note, the stop-and-go animation of the dodge shown below (timestamp is 18:03) can cause motion sickness very easily. It would be preferable if the dodge roll retained a smooth camera motion identical to the base movement speed. The shoulder charge dodge doesn't seem to have as jarring of an effect, but the movement both dodges travel relative to the animation time is still a concern I have.
https://youtu.be/GjEP4P5vDZI?t=1083 2
Comments
This is why diminishing returns on retreating/evasive options is important, to discourage/prevent this kind of overly-avoidant combat. I think having mana regen as a reward for successful combat actions (such as attacks/blocks/well timed dodges on an incoming attack) would serve as a reward for engaging in combat- to address the problem from both angles.
Unless I misunderstood the original comment, I don't think anyone is complaining about dodging itself- its more about the fact that whatever movement/evasion is in the game, both players can use it to traverse at an equal rate, meaning a passive player can always avoid combat and take advantage of the player trying to pursue him- so unless there is something to prevent indefinite retreating then, that could be a problem preventing people from enjoying the combat. This is why I suggested diminishing returns as a potential solution. Its really either that, or hard boundaries that spawn in the moment you start an engagement, which I don't think most people want in an open world mmorpg.
So yes I'm sure there will be a class that will be able to easily escape from others at times. Doesn't mean good cc, slow, interrupts etc don't cause them to get killed if they do try to run.
Hearing diminishing turns just sounds like a terrible idea, game should be balanced around cds so there shouldn't be a spam of abilities every second.
If we look at a game with high mobility like bdo that was cracked, even at that game all classes had some element of stuff to try to catch people without as much of a issue. Also, you have your mount in AoC.
Yea but its relative to both sides. The way combat is designed (and the approach they are taking Steven has been quoted on) is that players have tools to reach and maintain a certain desired distance during combat- so if snares are used to close distance for one player then snares are used to create distance for the other player- if speed and free movement is used to create distance for one player then speed and free movement is used to close distance for the other player.
So regardless, as I said originally both players can use their tools to control distance at the same rate, which means retreating indefinitely is a viable option with the current info.
The group balance is under the pretenses that combat is actually occuring. As in a group of 2 vs a group of 2 fighting each other who wins. The implications of indefinite retreat means combat can be avoided, which the "group balance" doesn't account for. This means that if a group of 2 is running away and you are are a rogue who is pursing with your tank friend, but your tank is left in the dust, then it is a 2v1 situation, and your "group balance" is out of the discussion at that point because they can continue doing that indefinitely. This is more of a "controlling when combat occurs" and "how fun is combat" topic- not really a "class balance" topic.
If it is optimal to be avoidant of combat then players will do so, which means combat is completely ruined for the classes that can't engage- so there would be no point in balancing all these classes within a combat system if only a handful can participate against players constantly running away. This isn't to mention the fact that kiting would be so strong that "players not wantinf to fight you" is the least of your worries. Good luck "balancing groups" when the long range fast classes can not only indefinitely run away but also damage you while doing so, completely invalidating other classes in not only combat but also survival/retreating themselves.
There are plenty of ways to distinguish classes without sacrficing the intended gameplay.
What? Im not understanding how diminishing returns in the context of my comment was linked to ability spam if you could clarify for me how you concluded that?
What I was referring to by diminishing returns was that retreating movement/retreating dodges/retreating evasive skills/anything retreating- if spammed would gradually lose its efficiency and/or effectiveness- so that it can still be used for its intended purpose during a fight without being used to infinitely run away from a fight.
It would actually discourage spam of retreating movement, which would allow for the "group combat balance" to come into play once everyone is actually fighting.
Im not implying that "running away" shouldn't be possible, but it shouldn't be meta. Especially when certain longer ranged classes would be able to do that while also killing the shorter ranged classes, regardless of party composition.
What I'm gathering is you are assuming other people won't have good chase and you can spam dodge to our run people which makes no sense to me when mmorpgs have CD. (spam does not including blowing all your cooldowns to create distance)
Raising a concern is one thing but I'll wait till I see the actual combat working as intended and the class balance. Before assuming dodge will be on second cd and spammable. Just find it weird that you go for making something nerfed rather than simply saying skills/actions should have a competent cd on them.
Also I'm very confident if a class has broken mobility it's going to get nerfed..
Agreed, but it needs to have certain amount of interactions from the closer ranged character's perspective- in order to give them opportunities to make up for their damage they took while pursuing. Thats how diffferent ranged characters are balanced in games. It can't be infinite kiting, or else the long range character are OP. Even at optimal skill usage they still need to be slowed enough to give the shorter range character a chance to fight back, before they can use mindgames to keep the shorter ranged character guessing which direction they will break off into next- allowing them to create distance again and repeat the process. This keeps character classes balanced. It doesn't need to be perfect balance, as different characters can have an "advantage" against others, but that doesn't mean invalidating the weaker class entirely- they should have chances to make plays and fight back.
I moreso accepting that CC/snares would have to be the approach taken if they allow for indefinite retreating movement- which they said they don't want to be too prevelant. They want agency and less CC/snares- which the implications of less CC/snares along with unhindered movement, is that it leads to indefinite retreating-unless you introduce the potential solutions I mentioned- unless they want to create spawning barriers in the open world combat.
Regardless of whether is tied to a cooldown or not though- if distance control is 100% equal relative to each character at all times- then it would be a problem, unless the retreating movement allows for the gap closer to catch up at some point, even at optimal skill usage.
Agreed- it is just a concern as of now, that I am emphasizing while its easy to tune
I like the dodge mechanic. But I haven't seen any game implement it as well as Guild Wars 2 has.
In that game, all classes get 2 dodge rolls that consume 50 endurance out of 100 (it takes 10 seconds to regenerate enough endurance for another dodge). They are .75s i-frames for incoming attacks (but they do not negate existing damage-over-time effects on the player). Furthermore, the dodges traverse the same amount of distance that any player could run in the same amount of time. Thus, dodges can not be used to create or close distance because your opponent can simply run towards or away from you.
If dodges can be used to create distance, and there aren't enough tools on a low enough cooldown to follow players through their movement, then dodges become the universal standard mobility tool. In my opinion, this would be uninteresting as:
- It takes the skill out of i-framing specific important attacks as the dodges would always put you out of range of your opponents melee attacks
- Makes combat predictable
- Forces you to dodge after your opponents dodging away from you as dodging would be the most consistent form of mobility
My concern is that dodging becomes a mobility tool rather than remaining skillful as a pure an i-frame for incoming damage.I agree with your point about New World. New World's light armor dodge is the perfect example of what not to do regarding dodge distance relative to the animation as you're forced to dodge, use a mobility skill, or ranged ability at your opponent every time they dodge.
The heavy and medium dodges in New World are just as bad because they don't travel as far as someone can run in the same amount of time. So, as isolated dodge mechanics, they're strictly worse in every way when compared to the light armor dodge. The main reason they are able to survive is through the innate, higher defensive stats on their armor. This system highly encourages melee players to use as heavy an armor weight as they can tolerate and simplifies gameplay.
Honestly things will be fine as long as it isn't new world with run meta that is the only game that feels like an example (which shouldn't be) in this current age.
If you think there is a issue with infinite kiting that is a balance concern and should have nothing to do with making a dodge useless because someone is using it.
If this existed in game and was broken i would comment on it, but i can't make an argument based off infinite kiting or bad design because i could argue infinite things about issues that might not actually exist.
1. I don't expect all classes to have as good chases that will be the nature of a game balanced around group play. Classes will all have their own strengths.
2. If a class has amazing mobility the fix isn't making the gameplay feel clunky for them which would be bad design. Fixes would be How often can they do it, what resources d they consume, is the distance or speed a little bit too much. I don't understand how the first option to come up is to make it feel clunky by reducing its effective speed / distance to create inconsistent and clunky combat.
@Blindside New world issue short form is
1. You have 0 gap closers or limited number of skills and if don't have one and they do so you can't catch them ability wise. NW WORLD has 0 balance on EVERYTHING. No mmorpg is like that.
2. New world causes your attack movement to be very scuf and slower meaning they can roll/dodge and have full movement back to run meta on you.
*edit I will say if using any ability roots you and you can't use it while moving and such (or skill just has 0 movement baked into it) than you will have new world issues.
Anything that creates distance (even if the opponent can use the same thing to close distance) can cause a kiting problem if mishandled- dodging included. If distance can be created at the same rate it can be closed then it is an issue, regardless of how this takes form- be it sprint, roll, skills, etc. Their needs to be a way to gradually close the gap even with optimal gameplay.
Again, im not saying to make anything useless. I am excited for dodge/movement skills/etc. I think its awesome, I am just saying that they need to be tuned to prevent infinite combat avoidance/infinite kiting. Its not neccessary to make them useless- thats why I explained in my first comment that they can still retain their use in combat if something like diminishing returns on retreating options is a thing. This allows them to be used as normal, in the sutuations they ar designed for- but as soon as someone decides to turn the other direction and spam them with the intentions of running away and/or kiting the next 20 minutes- those retreating movement options will lose their potency.
I understand but certain principles are constant and don't need to be tested to know how things will turn out. If movement is completely equalized at all times then kiting is meta. I am not saying to make changes, because like Vaknar pointed out they are still developing things, so they may have already implemented some of these mechanics I mentioned to prevent it from being a problem- we don't know- but it is still a concern and should be factored in as early as possible in the combat design.
I already addressed this "group play balancing" you brought up before though. That idea is within the context of combat- it has nothing to do with class/group-based balancing revolving around the transition between combat and non-combat states.
Regardless of how well things are balanced, they could literally be perfectly balanced grouos and classes- it would not change the fact that groups who are retreating would be able to kite pursuing groups and have a massive advantage, because that would be an inherent advantage with the "infinite retreating movement" that hasn't been accounted for at that point.
There must be a misunderstanding here. I tried to explain that no matter what you do with cooldowns or any kind of small mechanic or anything, no matter what you do, the only thing that matters is whether or not the ability to control distance is equalized 100% of the time between 2 characters. Anything that involves 100% equality results in kiting/retreatng meta flat out, unless barriers are a thing. By changing other things like resources/cooldowns/etc. all you will do is change the skill gap to achieve those outcomes- that doesn't change the fact that the outcome of kiting/retreating indefinitely is meta, and lame.
The whole reason I brought up these solutions was to maintain the ability to have freedom of movement/fast paced design. There is nothing "clunky" about allowing gap closers to catch up. Thats literally how every good game balances long and short range playstyles. The difference in an mmo is that its open world with no invisible walls most of the time. You still have the evasion skills/ freedom of movement/class skills/etc. to allow for the combat to feel fluid and empower the player- but while discouraging infinite retreating, which prevents the combat from becoming eternal chases and kiting- through balancing offense/defense, balancing different ranged playstyles, and helping to balance different ranged weapons.
I only worry about dodging/rolling/etc and end up stuck in terrain or furniture where I land
Good long ranged vs short ranged combat should be a fluxuation between
1. the long-ranged character kiting the short-ranged character
2. then the short ranged character catching up to get their opportunity to deal damage
3. then the short ranged-character trying to account for where the long-ranged character could go next, giving the long ranged-character an opportunity to outplay and create distance again.
4. Repeat
When it comes to balancing ranged and melee combat, achieving and maintaining effective range provides room for skill expression on both sides. To elaborate:
- All archetypes will want some combination of mobility, movement speed modifiers for themselves and for their opponents, crowd control + cc-breaks, defensive abilities, self-sustain, etc.
- A character that has access to ranged abilities will want to prioritize skills that allow them to create and maintain distance from them to their opponent.
- A character that has access to melee abilities will want to prioritize skills that allow them to close and maintain distance from them to their opponent.
If there is weapon/kit swapping in AoC, and a player has access to both ranged and melee abilities, a large part of skill expression in PvP will come down to how well a player understands the effective ranges of their skills vs. their opponents skills. Spacing, tracking cooldowns, having good movement, and utilizing their abilities well leads to dynamic and skill-based combat.If dodging is a baseline mechanic that every archetype has access to, simplifying its function to act as an i-frame for incoming damage without altering the distance a player can travel above/below their base movement speed in the same amount of time achieves the goal of low skill floor and high skill ceiling. This is because:
- Low skill floor: The mechanic is easy to understand. Incoming attacks are avoided during the animation. Value is generated as long as any incoming attack is avoided.
- High skill ceiling: Rewards dodging important skills like crowd controls or high damage abilities. Wasting dodges against good players can be punished as long as the dodge itself is unable to create distance during the animation. Significant value is generated when specific incoming attacks are avoided.
The issue arises when dodges move faster/slower than base movement speed. This results in high skill floor and low skill ceiling.If someone is better at movement than you they will most likely get away as with all games. Nor is everything going to be equal, if you choose to not spec into movement because you want big damage, you will be at a disadvantage in certain cases clearly.
End of the day ill trust the devs and wait till i see more I could name a crap ton of potential issues with any mmorpgs.
Agreed. Diminishing returns is a lazy way to balance. Artificially lowering the effectiveness of skills is a solution only when not enough ways to counterplay are implemented.
Yeah of course man, when you introduce skill difference that is a whole other scenario, of course the person who is better should have the advantage I don't think anyone is debating that. I was more referring to "all else equal" scenario where both players are the same skill, and what kind of meta would result from that, through the combat design.
As long as you understand the reasoning behind why the changes I suggested might be necessary, the numbers and tuning behind it shouldn't bother you. I think we can agree that we would want the diminishing returns to be as little as possible, but I wouldn't talk about a hard number limit and establish a hill to die on. I would just say that Intrepid should have the freedom to tune it in whatever way they need, in order to to address the issue, because that would lead to the best result at the end of the day.
I know it is a lot but did you happen to have the full thread?
I talked about the why diminishing returns would be a good solution, I definitely wouldn't consider it lazy, since it would allow for them to continue with the current combat direction of agency/limited snares- while also addressing the issue that comes with 100% equalized distance control between both combatants.
No, I didn't read everything. I only responded to what Mag said about diminishing returns. Can you link me the post you are referring to please?
The issue I have with diminishing returns (ie. incoming crowd control duration is reduced if you're already under the effects of a cc) is that it makes skill usage unpredictable and difficult to control in group settings.
I am not a fan of RNG in combat outside of % critical hit chance. For example, I dislike diminishing returns, % block, % evasion, and other similar mechanics. I believe consistency in functionality lends itself to reliable gameplay and provides clear feedback as to where someone can improve their decision-making. The more RNG is introduced, the more the distinction between skill levels is blurred. Introducing diminishing returns also opens up the ability for other people to grief your gameplay/gameplan if they play poorly.
Yeah- this was my original comment-
Mag brought up some additional points against my idea that I then talked about as well in my later comments that you can read through it in order from then on if you want. I will summarize my responses here though:
Basically, infinite retreating is no good since it ruins
1. class balance
2. weapon balance
3. combat pacing
4. Offense/defense balancing
5. Combat fun
All at once.
If the tools for controlling space between to characters are 100% equalized at optimal usage- meaning one combatant can create distance, just as much as the other combatant can close distance- Then infinite retreating is possible, unless you introduce some kind of barrier during combat to force combatant to fight in a small area.
This can only be addressed by making distance control not 100% equalized between the retreating combatant and the pursuing combatant.
Steven has said he wants to limit snares, so that should be off the table for being what the main combat experience that the combat balance revolves around as far as chasing opponents down.
Thus in order to maintain the combat direction of player agency (free movement/limited snares), while solving the problem of equalized distance control, I suggested diminishing returns, meaning the more the retreating combatant uses their tools to retreat, the less efficient and/or effective they become. This maintains there situational use and effectiveness, while preventing them from being eternally spammed to run away from every fight.
I don't like rng when it interferes with players skill- but in this case it enhances player skill, but allowing the higher-skilled combatant to engage and win a fight, rather than allowing a skill-less opponent who is playing a long range character running away while kiting and killing a shorter ranged character with no risk.
Not neccessarily- Steven has said they are already using diminishing returns to prevent CC spam from stun locking people in place during a group fight. This amount of CC reduction would just have to scale at a higher rate than the diminishing returns on retreating movement, to prevent the the CC application from overtaking the amount of movement allowed, causing the player to be stun locked. So, this wouldn't have to be a problem if tuned right.
Thank you for linking the post. Here are my thoughts regarding:
Infinite kiting:
- If there are a variety of build options players' can take that allow them kite/chase effectively and punish mistakes when utilized well, that would be ideal.
- This can also be solved through well-designed maps, gamemodes, and objectives that encourage fighting in certain areas. So while a player may be able to run away, they will not reap any benefits by doing so.
Equalized spacing:- I don't believe the tools to control space are going to be 100% equalized due to the archetype system.
- The point I emphasize is that dodging should not be a tool to control space, rather it should be a tool to avoid incoming attacks. From my experience, the instant dodging becomes a mobility tool, gameplay degenerates.
Diminishing returns for ccs:- Crowd control is an issue in all MMOs I've played except for one. Guild Wars 2 solved the issue through the stability buff and stunbreaks.
- Stability is a duration-based, purgeable buff that prevents the effects of incoming crowd control.
- Stunbreaks are utility skills (most builds have 2, but builds can have anywhere between 1-3 on average, 4 being the max + extremely rare) that instantly remove the effects of an existing crowd control from yourself and/or nearby allies.
- When utilized properly in conjunction with dodges, a highly skilled player on any class in Guild Wars 2 can reliably win against multiple players in PvP.
- Ashes of Creation talks a lot about player agency, and giving options to players to actively deal with CCs is a prime way to increase that. As I stated earlier, diminishing returns is a solution when existing methods of counterplay are insufficient. There is no need for diminishing returns if the players have tools they can use to interact with crowd control.
Some build options in Guild Wars 2 allow the player to reduce the duration of specific/all incoming crowd controls by a percentage (~20%). But with dodges, stunbreaks, and other defensive skills alone (stability is not necessary), it is very reasonable for a single, skilled player to deal with the the crowd control effects from multiple enemies.Infinite kiting:
Agreed
Yeah, personally I don't mind if dodge rolls can be used to control space, as long as it is skillful to use and can't be exploited to evade/kite infinitely- then I think it can be healthy and fun gameplay, its possible you may had those experiences when the mechanic was mis-handled, but it can be done well with thought put into it.
As far as the point I was going for relating to this-
From a combat design perspective, I don't think people should have to pick a certain class to be able to have fun and engaging combat- I think fun and engaging combat should the focus and design all the classes within those perimeters- Thus regardless of archetype I believe that space control should be unequalized between retreating and pursuing combatants at all times- This doesn't mean creating space isn't viable- it just means its balanced with gap closing styles. So there is still room for the archetypes to be distinguished by having their style, and allowing more skilled players to control space in their own way, better than the opponent- but my point is more about what the combat experience and meta should look like between 2 equally skilled combatants at max combat skill potential, done through diminishing returns on retreating options and full agency of movement:
For example- one combatant with retreating long range character and one with pursuing short range character- which should result in a fluxuation between closed distance and created distance- by giving the pursuing character the potential to catch up, with the long range character having the potential to keep the pursuer guessing and open up opportunities to create distance again after the gap is closed. All done through skill, rewarding the better player with success in controlling space in their style. This should just be a baseline thing of how combat should work, and how archeypes with different ranges should be balanced.
Yeah- diminishing returns as far as CC goes was Stevens decision- I was just explaining how it could interact with diminishing returns on retreating movement options.
this makes sense but... if we both run at the same speed, then you will never catch me anyways, and your dodge won't help you if it moves you less distance than just running. Do you use a dash? I use a dash too. do you slow me? I slow you too.
the issue isn't really dodging to escape, because you could always use your own dodges to chase, unless its something ridiculous like nw and the weight system, which also makes sense on paper since heavy armor shouldn't dodge like cloth armor but it ruins pvp when implemented lol. the issue is being able to escape a fight when you are about to die and completely reset it by using potions or whatever.
I think dodging should move you further than walking distance. its kinda like you jumping out of the way. but it should be limited and not spammable, to prevent people in mass pvp from getting close, using an attack then dodge spamming back to safety, getting a heal then repeating.
Thank you for your feedback. I want to note that you also wouldn't be able to run away from me if we both ran at the same speed. Your statement assumes I am already out of range of my attacks.
Regardless, I understand what you're saying regarding run speed, dashes, and slows. With the different archetypes, there are sure to be inequalities in the functionalities of skills. A fighter may have stronger dashes and slows, a ranger may have more ways to increase their run speed. Trading skills effectively is a key part of combat and 1-for-1 trades are bound to happen.
However, dodge distance relative to the animation time should remain the same as base movement speed. I can explain using your example:
- Scenario 1 (dodge distance relative to time = SAME as base movement speed):
- Scenario 2 (dodge distance relative to time = HIGHER than base movement speed):
In Scenario 2, every dodge used requires movement + an additional skill to close the distance. So, 1 input (dodge, a response to an enemy skill) forces the other player to also respond or else they lose the trade. If dodging is a universal mechanic common to all archetypes, the most effective way to follow someone through movement in a situation similar to Scenario 2 is to dodge when your opponent dodges. It is bad enough to have a pure defensive skill (like a dodge roll) force a cooldown from the enemy. It is worse when the most reliable method of staying within range of an enemy after they dodge is to dodge after them. But that becomes the solution to trade 1 ability for 1 ability.- Player A uses a high damage, single hit melee ability.
- Player B dodges the ability.
- Player A runs towards Player B during the dodge animation and is still in melee range after, within range to continue trading.
As a result, Player A uses an attack (1 ability), Player B skillfully dodged the ability (1 ability), Player A skillfully tracked the movement of the dodge (0 abilities, pure movement from holding W), and they can continue the fight.Both players use 1 ability. The trade is equal.
- Player A uses a high damage, single hit melee ability.
- Player B dodges the ability.
- Player A runs towards Player B during the dodge animation, however they are out of melee range, unable to continue trading.
As a result, Player A uses an attack (1 ability), Player B skillfully dodged the ability (1 ability), Player A skillfully tracked the movement of the dodge, but even in an equal trade of effectiveness (attack for dodge), Player B is safe. This requires Player A to use an additional skill to close the distance.Player A is forced to use 2 abilities, Player B only had to use 1. Player B wins the trade.
Look at New World. Even with 2 opponents using light armor, the only way to consistently stay within melee range of your opponent if they light dodge away from you is to also light dodge after them. If the light armor dodge had its distance traveled relative to the animation time the same as the base movement speed, this would not be the case. Instead, if your opponent light dodges away from you, you could run towards them during the animation and time an ability to hit them after the end of their dodge. This increases outplay potential significantly because it forces dodges to be used to i-frame specific attacks or else you could get punished. On the flipside, if dodges i-frame + move faster than your opponent can run in the same amount of time, it would put you at a safe distance unless they also dodged or used a movement ability after you.
PLEASE do not use NW as an example of combat. Attack movement is non-existent in that game. Your example revolves around dodge spam. No one wants dodge spam.
I brought up NW as an example of what NOT to do. No one wants dodge spam but this was shown in one of the updates for AoC (7:22 into the vid):
This is the issue I'm talking about. Through dodging alone, Steven created a significant amount of space between himself and his enemies. He dodged 3 times, and it took 3 seconds for the enemy to run within range again. That means each dodge has the potential to create 1 second of space (and that's with Steven backpedaling which has lower movement speed than running forwards).
- 1 second of space is 1 second where a melee opponent has to figure out how to close the gap to hit you with a skill. Regardless of whether an attack was successfully avoided with the dodge, value has been created. 1 second of space can be maintained by the defender. The aggressor must use a gap closer, ranged ability, or DODGE in response to maintain effectiveness.
You should never have to dodge in response to an enemy dodging. A pure defensive ability should never force someone to use a defensive skill themselves to trade effectively.On the flipside, if dodging cannot be used to create space, every single offensive ability in the game with an animation time equal to or lower than the dodge can be used to punish an opponent who wastes a dodge. In this case, responding to a dodge would not be pigeonholed into a gap closer, ranged ability, or dodging towards them yourself which opens up a lot of counterplay options and raises the skill ceiling of the game.
This is the issue with open development people look at something and don't look at it critically from the game is in alpha. It is extremely clear that you will have CD on your skills in a mmorpg and won't be spammed. What is shown is god mode (as usual) meaning ton of life, lower, cds, etc.
My question to you is why critique god mode as if an example of what gameplay will be or were you not aware it was in god mode with cds being so short / nonexistent?
I am fully aware that god mode was turned on in the gameplay, and that no resources or cooldowns were being consumed.
The issue exists even if Steven were to dodge a single time. The issue compounds as more dodges are used. A cooldown does not solve the problem, because the cooldown is not the issue here. If you do not understand this, then you do not understand the problem.