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.

Stances instead of Cameras

SolvrynSolvryn Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
edited January 2023 in General Discussion
I've been formulating this idea,

Stances instead of cameras;

Offensive Stance, which was the Action Combat Camera.
Defensive Stance, which was the Tab/Aim Assist Camera.

Take all of the skills and let them be truly neutral, free aim (or hitscan if we have to) and freely moving across 3d space.

Then assign if/and statements to them.

Example) Snipe: If in Offensive Stance, Snipe becomes free aim and deals bonus damage. If in Defensive Stance, Snipe deals base damage but implements stagger.

Takes a base component of an ability, then adds a variable to be met which would change the behavior of it. Abilities in Offensive Stance can be unhindered by any constraints which makes for tactile, reactive play while Defensive stance makes for predictive, intuitive decision making.

Like the heal/damage ability in the cleric video. In Offensive stance, it hits a mob and does damage, but in defensive stance its cast on the player or any of the players allies.

It sets up ten abilities to have twice the number of decisions in how to use them with just the individual playing alone, then further creates more meaningful decisions with the synergies in between classes.

It allows for many different combinations of offensive, defensive, and utility/support combinations which also match the theme of risk vs reward.

Cheers.

Comments

  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    I think, somehow, camera is the wrong word/concept for what you are trying to describe.
    And... I think Stances would be implemented by the Ashes devs as an addition, rather than a replacement for Action v Tab.
  • SolvrynSolvryn Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited January 2023
    Dygz wrote: »
    I think, somehow, camera is the wrong word/concept for what you are trying to describe.
    And... I think Stances would be implemented by the Ashes devs as an addition, rather than a replacement for Action v Tab.

    Steven called them cameras.

    The idea is to instead treat them like stances that we can switch between.

    Assigning if/and statement changes their behavior based on the stance we take.

    10 skills with more choices to make.
  • LudulluLudullu Member, Alpha Two
    I'd personally be against this kind of approach cause I like the "planning ahead" games rather than purely reactionary ones. If each ability can be used in both ways at any time - there's no real need to plan your build. But if you gotta make a choice of what "stance" your want your abilities to be available in - you'll take a risk that might not pay off or could instead pay off big time.

    And so far it seems like that's the plan. You'll be able to set your ability to either action or tab mode beforehand and only have it in that mode until you change it (with some abilities seemingly available in both modes).
  • SolvrynSolvryn Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    NiKr wrote: »
    I'd personally be against this kind of approach cause I like the "planning ahead" games rather than purely reactionary ones. If each ability can be used in both ways at any time - there's no real need to plan your build. But if you gotta make a choice of what "stance" your want your abilities to be available in - you'll take a risk that might not pay off or could instead pay off big time.

    And so far it seems like that's the plan. You'll be able to set your ability to either action or tab mode beforehand and only have it in that mode until you change it (with some abilities seemingly available in both modes).

    That’s exactly why I thought about stances instead.

    Schools are still going to be there, tertiary stats, etc.

    Increasing the decision making capability.


  • LudulluLudullu Member, Alpha Two
    Solvryn wrote: »
    That’s exactly why I thought about stances instead.

    Schools are still going to be there, tertiary stats, etc.

    Increasing the decision making capability.
    But then it wouldn't be an "instead", but just an additional effect. And as Dygz said, I feel like augments might cover what you're suggesting.
  • SolvrynSolvryn Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    NiKr wrote: »
    Solvryn wrote: »
    That’s exactly why I thought about stances instead.

    Schools are still going to be there, tertiary stats, etc.

    Increasing the decision making capability.
    But then it wouldn't be an "instead", but just an additional effect. And as Dygz said, I feel like augments might cover what you're suggesting.

    Well, they'll cover additional tertiary effects, but they wont cover the behavior of the ability either being free aim or not.

    That's a major part of the if/and statement.

    I think Intrepids idea to have a hybrid system is great, but I don't the current limitations will achieve what it could.

    I think being able to go in between stances offers more depth and makes sure the combat has no missing components.
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    I'm not a fan of stance dancing.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • LudulluLudullu Member, Alpha Two
    Solvryn wrote: »
    Well, they'll cover additional tertiary effects, but they wont cover the behavior of the ability either being free aim or not.

    That's a major part of the if/and statement.

    I think Intrepids idea to have a hybrid system is great, but I don't the current limitations will achieve what it could.

    I think being able to go in between stances offers more depth and makes sure the combat has no missing components.
    I mean, we have 0 fucking clue about the augment system outside of the unbelievably basic example of "you get a TP if you use mage augment on a rush ability". One god damn example for 6 years of development :|
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    We have a tad more - summoner provides summoned weapons as secondary. We know mage gives augment schools of fire and ice. We know cleric gives life or death etc.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • SolvrynSolvryn Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    NiKr wrote: »
    Solvryn wrote: »
    Well, they'll cover additional tertiary effects, but they wont cover the behavior of the ability either being free aim or not.

    That's a major part of the if/and statement.

    I think Intrepids idea to have a hybrid system is great, but I don't the current limitations will achieve what it could.

    I think being able to go in between stances offers more depth and makes sure the combat has no missing components.
    I mean, we have 0 fucking clue about the augment system outside of the unbelievably basic example of "you get a TP if you use mage augment on a rush ability". One god damn example for 6 years of development :|

    I agree with your frustrations, but I'm not going there on my thread.

    All I know is what I read from the wiki and ashes101.
  • SolvrynSolvryn Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Neurath wrote: »
    I'm not a fan of stance dancing.

    I think it can be done really well.
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Nah. I've seen it before and it's horrid. 2vs1 gets you killed because one stance counters and one stance matches.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • SolvrynSolvryn Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Neurath wrote: »
    Nah. I've seen it before and it's horrid. 2vs1 gets you killed because one stance counters and one stance matches.

    We have different experiences; I've seen stance dancing done incredibly well.

  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Stance dancer used to be an insult. Furthermore, Ashes devs have struggled to nail hybrid combat. I don't particularly want to advocate for a fourth combat iteration.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • LudulluLudullu Member, Alpha Two
    Neurath wrote: »
    We have a tad more - summoner provides summoned weapons as secondary. We know mage gives augment schools of fire and ice. We know cleric gives life or death etc.
    What do those entail? What does that even mean? Like, ok, the mage elemental one is probably self-explanatory and even more basic than the TP school. But what da hell do life/death/summoned stuff mean? It's all beyond vague, where, in theory, this stuff should've been done in the design stage of the development quite literally years ago.

    There's a chance that for some arbitrary reason Intrepid don't want to tell us a single shred of info about the system, but if that's the case then I find it real weird, considering their "open development" and desire to listen to our feedback.

    I'd imagine it's easier to tweak a design on paper rather than changing a whole damn finished product. Our feedback will either not matter, because all augments will have been completed by the time we can even give feedback on them, or those augments will have to be completely redesigned reanimated and recoded if our feedback goes directly against some of them and Intrepid listen to us. And the obvious worst option is that no other augments have been designed yet, which is why we haven't heard about them.
  • SolvrynSolvryn Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Neurath wrote: »
    Stance dancer used to be an insult. Furthermore, Ashes devs have struggled to nail hybrid combat. I don't particularly want to advocate for a fourth combat iteration.

    Hmm. I don't remember stance dancer ever being an insult in WoW. Ashes has struggled to nail combat in general.

    Some people want tab, some people want action. But hybrid is what we're going to get. I rather not get something inconsistent and lacks continuity when it comes to their other systems, art, etc.

    I do not want to see Flintstones in Dubai.
  • SolvrynSolvryn Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    NiKr wrote: »
    Neurath wrote: »
    We have a tad more - summoner provides summoned weapons as secondary. We know mage gives augment schools of fire and ice. We know cleric gives life or death etc.
    What do those entail? What does that even mean? Like, ok, the mage elemental one is probably self-explanatory and even more basic than the TP school. But what da hell do life/death/summoned stuff mean? It's all beyond vague, where, in theory, this stuff should've been done in the design stage of the development quite literally years ago.

    There's a chance that for some arbitrary reason Intrepid don't want to tell us a single shred of info about the system, but if that's the case then I find it real weird, considering their "open development" and desire to listen to our feedback.

    I'd imagine it's easier to tweak a design on paper rather than changing a whole damn finished product. Our feedback will either not matter, because all augments will have been completed by the time we can even give feedback on them, or those augments will have to be completely redesigned reanimated and recoded if our feedback goes directly against some of them and Intrepid listen to us. And the obvious worst option is that no other augments have been designed yet, which is why we haven't heard about them.

    It's the mystery we're all waiting for.
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    The secondary archetypes will be in A2. The reason there hasn't been much fanfare about the propositions is because Jeff left. The combat has improved since Jeff left though so I'm not too concerned.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • SolvrynSolvryn Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    @NiKr @Neurath I appreciate you both.
  • DepravedDepraved Member, Alpha Two
    Solvryn wrote: »
    I've been formulating this idea,

    Stances instead of cameras;

    Offensive Stance, which was the Action Combat Camera.
    Defensive Stance, which was the Tab/Aim Assist Camera.

    Take all of the skills and let them be truly neutral, free aim (or hitscan if we have to) and freely moving across 3d space.

    Then assign if/and statements to them.

    Example) Snipe: If in Offensive Stance, Snipe becomes free aim and deals bonus damage. If in Defensive Stance, Snipe deals base damage but implements stagger.

    Takes a base component of an ability, then adds a variable to be met which would change the behavior of it. Abilities in Offensive Stance can be unhindered by any constraints which makes for tactile, reactive play while Defensive stance makes for predictive, intuitive decision making.

    Like the heal/damage ability in the cleric video. In Offensive stance, it hits a mob and does damage, but in defensive stance its cast on the player or any of the players allies.

    It sets up ten abilities to have twice the number of decisions in how to use them with just the individual playing alone, then further creates more meaningful decisions with the synergies in between classes.

    It allows for many different combinations of offensive, defensive, and utility/support combinations which also match the theme of risk vs reward.

    Cheers.

    isn't this how it already works? some abilities will be targetted or action only, and some others will do different things depending on your combat mode
  • SolvrynSolvryn Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Depraved wrote: »
    Solvryn wrote: »
    I've been formulating this idea,

    Stances instead of cameras;

    Offensive Stance, which was the Action Combat Camera.
    Defensive Stance, which was the Tab/Aim Assist Camera.

    Take all of the skills and let them be truly neutral, free aim (or hitscan if we have to) and freely moving across 3d space.

    Then assign if/and statements to them.

    Example) Snipe: If in Offensive Stance, Snipe becomes free aim and deals bonus damage. If in Defensive Stance, Snipe deals base damage but implements stagger.

    Takes a base component of an ability, then adds a variable to be met which would change the behavior of it. Abilities in Offensive Stance can be unhindered by any constraints which makes for tactile, reactive play while Defensive stance makes for predictive, intuitive decision making.

    Like the heal/damage ability in the cleric video. In Offensive stance, it hits a mob and does damage, but in defensive stance its cast on the player or any of the players allies.

    It sets up ten abilities to have twice the number of decisions in how to use them with just the individual playing alone, then further creates more meaningful decisions with the synergies in between classes.

    It allows for many different combinations of offensive, defensive, and utility/support combinations which also match the theme of risk vs reward.

    Cheers.

    isn't this how it already works? some abilities will be targetted or action only, and some others will do different things depending on your combat mode

    Not really, I was thinking about implementing a way to change the behavior of an ability depending on which stance your in.

    The "Cameras" you have now don't actually do that. The current iteration of the "Action Camera" is very similar to how the GW2 camera works where tabbing in GW2 is still the superior mode.

    It was an idea because I actually can and enjoy stance dancing.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Solvryn wrote: »
    Steven called them cameras.

    The idea is to instead treat them like stances that we can switch between.

    Assigning if/and statement changes their behavior based on the stance we take.

    10 skills with more choices to make.
    I understand Steven's use of the term camera.
    I don't think your usage is the same.

  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    NiKr wrote: »
    There's a chance that for some arbitrary reason Intrepid don't want to tell us a single shred of info about the system, but if that's the case then I find it real weird, considering their "open development" and desire to listen to our feedback.
    That was mostly just "Sharif Hype" - back when Steven was still a naive gamer, thinking he could perform miracles that no other developer had yet accomplished - like releasing an MMORPG in 3 years.
    Again... we can't even get the last Know Your Nodes articles released because the devs are still tweaking Node designs. And the 1st articles were released 3.5 years ago.

    We haven't truly been in "open development" for years now.
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    Dygz wrote: »
    NiKr wrote: »
    There's a chance that for some arbitrary reason Intrepid don't want to tell us a single shred of info about the system, but if that's the case then I find it real weird, considering their "open development" and desire to listen to our feedback.
    That was mostly just "Sharif Hype" - back when Steven was still a naive gamer, thinking he could perform miracles that no other developer had yet accomplished - like releasing an MMORPG in 3 years.
    Again... we can't even get the last Know Your Nodes articles released because the devs are still tweaking Node designs. And the 1st articles were released 3.5 years ago.

    We haven't truly been in "open development" for years now.

    It is open development, it also doens't mean every single thing they do needs to be public knowledge either or where they are at. But you will be well aware of the game and how everything works during development when they are ready to show it and before release.

    Consumers shouldn't be knowing every detail on development regardless as they aren't prepared to the challenge of development or have understanding to accept certain things (direction, process, issues, delays, etc) End of the day a consumer is not a developer they can give input on what they like, they don't like, some ideas but that goes only so far and needs to be shown in the correct way to make the best use of it. And not showing a bunch of underdeveloped or prototype things to be over hyped and wanted and removed from being in the game.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited January 2023
    You say that because you weren't here in the early days when we had roadmaps and more.
    We went from what was once extremely transparent to what is now fairly opaque, by comparison.
    Steven had to learn learn that consumers shouldn't be knowing every detail - that didn't happen until after Margaret was hired in 2019.
  • LudulluLudullu Member, Alpha Two
    Dygz wrote: »
    You say that because you weren't here in the early days when we had roadmaps and more.
    We went from what was once extremely transparent to what is now fairly opaque, by comparison.
    Steven had to learn learn that consumers shouldn't be knowing every detail - that didn't happen until after Margaret was hired in 2019.
    Imo this is ultimately a good thing cause it proves that Steven does listen to his employees on this kind of stuff.
  • SolvrynSolvryn Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Dygz wrote: »
    Solvryn wrote: »
    Steven called them cameras.

    The idea is to instead treat them like stances that we can switch between.

    Assigning if/and statement changes their behavior based on the stance we take.

    10 skills with more choices to make.
    I understand Steven's use of the term camera.
    I don't think your usage is the same.

    More than likely true. I may be a bit more literal.
Sign In or Register to comment.