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
pvp video games have been around since the 70s and encounters would last a couple of seconds...
anyways street fighter is different than an mmorpg, and nothing wrong with ending a match quickly in SF or MK or a fighting game, as mag said, it means you played really well. you don't get a party and healers in SF
Based on your own words here and based on having watched that clip, it sounds like what you actually enjoy is having a 1-player game disguised as pvp. I don't think anyone here has a problem with you getting a 12 second TTK in Ashes if the opponent fumbles everything, but it's also not relevant.
That video also starts when one of the players is already injured. Is there some valid reason we aren't counting the time it took for that into the TTK? Doubly irrelevant.
Also can I just say, if you were trying to be genuinely useful, wouldn't you be sharing a clip with a working game timer? We can check approximately how long the fight was using the clip's timer, but if we wanted any kind of precision when talking about how long defensive options add or subtract from the TTK, we'd want the match timer working.
This is a weird mix of disingenuous and not useful.
Pretty insulting post ill just say that right off the bat. You are jumping in here literally to be disingenuous and try to twist up the post.
If you are going to respond to a post make sure you understand the context, which the context is the suggestion its not satisfying in a fighting game to win in 15 seconds (to me it is hens the clip). You are heavily trying to read into the post than just take it for what it is.
Also u clearly didn't watch the video talking about someone being almost dead. Next time watch the full video for the full context. Or do i need to spoon feed you every element of the video...
I guess I need to do that. You see in the video there is 2 rounds that happen one is mid way from the first round. Clearly you can see that is above 20 seconds in time. But you see in the last round you can clearly do as you said, and actually you know...count the time its right there. And you can see its 12 seconds into the round. That means under 15 seconds..
Please don't say what i enjoy you don't know me, and you didn't understand the context of the clip to begin with. You were racing to say some non-sense showing you were coming at this to be negative to begin with.
Though ill be happy to have an apology if you weren't trying to be an ass.
I think my gaming ability is just fine. Ironically 10s TTK would probably require less skill. Who has their CDs up wins. You engages first? Probably going to win. The ceiling for skill to be showcased is diminished at 10s AVERAGE.
We can make a argument if you stand still and do not fight back(well), use abilities smartly or dodge. That indeed would be a skill issue. Now if you are doing all those elements there shouldn't be a reason you die quickly.
We can go with the argument that for some reason someone is on CDS, and if they can't out play ona general level because of that it be a lower skill ceiling. The answer to that imo is defensive skills which is the whole point. Your ability to effective block attacks, dodge attacks, and parry now. All matter allowing you to reduce dmg you take and have their own skills on CD. On top of other defensive passives you might have (higher protect to first CC hitting you).
It means someone who is good defensively can win in that kind of situation, and creates a skill ceiling around that element of gameplay. People who are not as good defensively will have a higher chance of losing engagements until they increase their own skill.
Edit*
I see you liked that post which was a passive aggressive insult to me. Make sure you watch my video and understand what is going on in it. As the post is just throwing misinformation as they didn't watch the full clip.
0 reason to like that post which is a blatant lie + passive aggressive vibes.
I mean I don't think his post was insulting but I don't control how you see it. I do think attributing an argument against 10 seconds as a skill issue has more of a claim to what could be deemed insulting. With that said I'm not interested in getting in an insult war with you as I generally like your posts. It's just clear we disagree on this issue.
Your video of 1v1 in a fighter game gives light on how you could see it as a skill issue, but I don't think that genre is a fair translation to AoC and the argument at hand.
Sounds pretty convenient to say you don't control how i see things, when i pointed out the issues with the post directly and you are doubling down. But ok
Insult war, funny.
1. You are taking what i said as if it is in your own shoes directly and not for general players.
2. You are a type of player that doesn't dodge attacks, etc.
3. Your mind set is fully tab target and it doesn't make sense yo be able to dodge attacks.
You are trying to use a convenient term "disagreement" when I've directly pointed out elements. As you can't refute them so its easier for you to ignore things, and i guess just like "disingenuous" post rather than actually have a discussion.
What i see in soul calibur has nothing to do with the disccusion about things being a skill issue. And only related to you talking about it isn't fun to win in 15 seconds in a fighting game.
Now why i see the potential skill ceiling with AoC is because of what has been talked about and shown in the GAME. Elements you clearly have missed or are ignoring.
Elements that include
1. Being able to miss attacks
2. Being able to dodge attacks
3. Full universal skill tree for defensive passives / effects for players (this is new)
4. Active Dodge, block, parry
5. Abilities in kits to have movement (warrior jump, cleric skill, wizard teleport, etc)
In what world are we going to keep ignoring the potential of these skills in the hands of a veteran player, and the skill ceiling that it can add to reduce / negate dmg and waste CDs of players.
Steven said 10-15 second average when players are of the same level and gear score. He did not say 10-15 second average if no 'defensive elements' were used. I'm not ignoring your points because they're inconvenient, but because they are already implied within the 10-15 second TTK so it's a waste of time to debate it.
but we don't know exactly how they are measuring the ttk. is it attacking someone afk, or attacking someone using their skills defensively?
steven said mobs ttk was changed to 6 seconds, that's a couple of skills and a couple of autos. they also didn't mention mobs using defensive skills or healing or or damage type resistances or anything...it seems they just measured the ttk with the mob not doing anything. it kind of makes sense to measure the same way in PVP.
if all the things mag mentioned are implied, do you think measuring ttk when a player is running away, kiting, using LoS to cancel spells, etc, etc would give an accurate measurement of ttk?
seems to me that they just measure attacking an afk player.
Please show me the quote where its implied, @NiKr you can as well since you are supporting the point.
I'm open to seeing the point where they have included the defensive skill tree as well, you know the one that is in development and we haven't seen yet. And how it was tested and how it works with things.
Skip to the TTK question.
edit to add: I'm mainly taking that implication because otherwise healers and tanks dying THREE TIMES as slow would imply that their hp/def values are fucking three times higher than that of dps (if it was a "target doesn't do shit' test) and I sure as hell hope that is not the case, especially considering how both cleric and tank were considered kinda OP in A1 cause one could both heal and do dmg, while the other was a CC machine that still did ok dps.
So them just standing around and STILL dying in 30s instead of 10s would imply that if were they do use their skills - they'd be literally unbeatable.
I feel both you and nikr are really not understanding the potential gameplay of this game with what i keep talking about. If this was full tab you might be more correct. It is pretty obvious if you are a tank you have more HP and will survive longer naturally the same as a healer. You are failing to understand what I'm talking about with skill ceiling and defensive abilities.
So not much more point of me going on.
As usual ill wait for them to show more of the character skills, show the universal defensive tree, and see how players are playing the game. And then ill at both you. Which at that point people will again be surprised as usual.
Focused Fire is always going to be a factor in the possibility of going down quickly.
So if healer and tank are breaching 25 to 30 seconds you are good to go.
The DPS need to avoid taking too much damage, the Tank needs to control the field, the Healer needs to keep up and watch for target switching.
Having DPS with that longevity is ridiculous. I've been in those games (plural) and it's boring and pointless button spam that people call "tactical"
PVE ttk for normal mobs should be 10 seconds or around it not too long not too short and let the mobs feel dangerous and threatening
I like how you are going with the assumption people get more attack than defense.
That i'll go under the assumption people with get more defensive than attack lmao. So the TTk will be longer based on peoples builds, and that exceptionally increased based on their skill.
So its better the TTK should be as it is right now.
I'm not sure if this kinda thing usually works for you with other people? So let's break it down.
I understand the context you were replying to wrt "not satisfying in a fighting game to win in 15 seconds". It's because I understand it, that I replied you seemed to prefer 1-player games disguised as pvp.
It's not called trying to heavily read into a post when you make the most immediate surface level observations available based on what a person is saying and showing. Trying to heavily read into a post would be more like me coming up with a personality profile based on these replies, which I haven't bothered to do. And this is neither here nor there but is there a particular merit to "not reading into things"? In general, it figures one would try to understand where the other person is coming from.
The second round that you so kindly "spoon fed" to me is worse than the first one. I counted 5-6 fumbles from your opponent in that one, as opposed to 3-4 in the first one. Please do correct me if I misjudged what is happening there, I'd love to have my opinion changed. I have no doubts you enjoyed beating on that helpless opponent, and I make no claims otherwise. I also know from experience that dealing damage in most fighting games involves hours of grinding execution, it's an actual skill. It just isn't interactive skill for the most part. When your opponent fumbles, you get closer to a 1-player game in function, which is what I said.
Also, I'm only going to say this once. People can make reasonable judgments/inferences about your internet persona based on what that persona says and shows. Particularly since you said it so explicitly on your own.
___________________________________________________________
For everyone else just trying to get something useful out of this, here it is: people do often enjoy beating their opponent down for 12-15 seconds or however long. That's not the problem. The problem is when people approach design questions based on this, because the second you've done that, you're basically running with the assumption the shoe will never be on the other foot, that you will never have to sit there for 12-15 seconds of failing to do anything relevant before just being dead. Game designers cannot afford not to ask "well what if the situation was reversed, would the person still enjoy that? would they feel like they have agency?"
There are of course people who just want to take turns with their opponent on who gets to combo the other one, but I hope we can all agree here, this isn't very interactive.
There is little difference between a target dummy and someone who fumbles every defensive reaction when it comes to the time it takes to kill them. It doesn't particularly make sense for Intrepid to design around that, does it? Most people imagine themselves putting up at least a reasonable level of fight, which would make more sense to tune TTK around.
If the people attacking you are higher level, have better gear, are traveling in large numbers, and manage to gank you with sneak attacks, you could say they earned the kill.
Flip that on its head. If the person attacking you can't kill you there is no reward. If you can't be killed, then there is no risk. Now no one is having any fun.
This is a strawman. I don't think you meant to do it, it's probably just a misunderstanding, but it represents a position convenient to argue against, rather than what my actual position is.
To put it very simply, where did I say anything about not being able to kill people?
Then argue against it. Don't say "I could" and then change the topic
Steven, at this point, has stated several times that AoC's ttk will be on the faster side. This means that this is Intrepid's plan for the game's balancing and design. And to me this means that all defensive abilities will give you as much protection as one would need to die within the ttk described by Steven in that answer.
As I've stated before, my issue here is that short ttk means easy assist-kills in group pvp. You seem to be fine with that judging by this
So there's not much else I can say here.
I think at the very least the testing will tell us a lot. I'm guessing some classes will have the tools to handle this and some won't. They'll have to do a lot of adjusting regardless.
I have no clue what kind of surface observation you are trying to read into, it is as simple as this. Someone says people don't enjoy something, I say no I play this type of game and that is something I can enjoy.
There is no deeper meaning to understand or extra detail to dissect.
I'm not really here to have a detailed break down of a old clip. Also he isn't helpless he is an amazing player, you are pretty much insulting him. He took a few gambles and lost since i played different is all there was to it. And he Tried to big brain to jump over my skill, but I'm use to that kind of element of top players and play unpredictably in waves.
Anyway I can see the issue is we are both out of sync, it would have been much better rather than do that weird first approach, is just have a conversation and ask some questions and lead it into another direction. If you wanted to have a interaction with me and understand how i might think and feel on certain elements in that might come to light in AoC.
You don't need to respond to above.
~~~~
My stance on this is generally the same, people should be able to react to elements in a fight. If you die more quickly do to lower ttk on classes, defensive options need to be stronger. Of course I'm not really wanting BDO with its cat and mouse and first person to get a cc wins.
Again AoC is a team based games, to me plenty of you are looking at it in mainly a 1v1 situation and saying TTK is too short or going to the extreme that suddenly everyone id dps and all 8 can freely target someone easily.
1. Yes my first points are more about 1v1 situations because I'm trying to point out the skill ceiling available and defensive options + (new skill tree they will be showing) and trying to point out do to the skill ceiling that time can be made to be longer.
2. As AoC is a party game you are going to have a comp of other classes synergizing and working together. Clerics will heal you meaning all classes with lor or high TTK will have more buffer and increased survivability, tanks to peel off allies and most likely give them some protections, ccs from other classes to help peel and slow people down, etc.
As I've said before all this needs to be tested and balanced, if gameplay is people can not react to anything than ttk should be increased.
There is no coping here, all I'm going to say is wait and sit back. And ill tag you again when we see more and more of the kit.
Having mobility and defensive options * a skilled player doesn't make balancing work like that. If we look at any game with a high skill ceiling you would see that. The tools of what a player does allows them to push the limits. The higher the skill ceiling you can get into the realm of a person can not lose a fight.
If i look at shooters for a moment like Titanfall 1. TTk is on COD level and very short you are dying in like 1-2 seconds. Though with mobility + stim (it gives you a speed boost and starts to auto regen your hp). I can stretch my hp between multiple fights while dodging most bullets mid fight. Allowing me to win pretty much almost every engagement if the person isn't beyond atleast an average level.
Remove the mobility and that skill ceiling and my potential of winning 100% pros down immensely, same for stim to the point one would have to play differently.
I'm really not coping I'm going based on what they have been showing and my view point has grown or changed as we all learn more. I remember talking about modern game design and you were saying AoC was going old school and was just going to be like linage. To me that is coping based on what he had been seeing and what they talk about.
When I'm looking at games yes we all have our assumptions but im basing mine with what is said and shown generally with a bit of my own bias. So when you hear the recently information about a defensive universal skill tree. Instantly I'm realizing that is another element that is going to add a higher skill ceiling to the game, mixed between the class abilities we have seen and that there is going to be heavy customization in the game.
Average players are going to fall into the realm of lower ttk, skilled players are going to go beyond what you think is possible.
Why in the everliving hell would I care about some uberpro who can dodge better than Neo did in Matrix? Steven said "average ttk will be lower than in other games", he then doubled down and said it'll be 10s for dps and then says "that's the intent", which means they are balancing the game that way.
You say "I see and listen what they do/say and then base my opinion on that", but you literally go against Steven's words here. And also, the "30s for tanks/heals" seems to even be in the context of "heal vs heal" or "tank vs tank" (though this would probably be the most arguable point here).
Like, we can all dream to be this dude and turn a 0.1 ttk into a damn win
But only a select few will be at that level. And I couldn't give fewer shits about what the do/think about the ttk, because I'm talking about average gameplay situations with average people in average gear. And those people will have *snap*ped real quick by any even slightly stronger attacker, because of how low the average ttk is planned to be in Ashes.
Steven believes that this low ttk will somehow beat zergs, but, as YOU YOURSELF LITERALLY SAID IN THE PAST - nowadays zerg is not a dumb huge ball of lowskill players and is instead a collection of hardcore way-above-average career-gamers who will wipe the game with good coordination.
And your all-so-hated zerg will reign supreme, in part, due to the lower ttk, because higher-skilled smaller groups simply wouldn't be able to withstand an aoe barage from 20 people at once and would just drop dead.
bruh most of the people complaining about 10-15 secs ttk are f1 spammers. their argument is "whoever attacks first or unloads their combo first wins" wtf?