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.

Throne and Liberty further proves Ashes needs Factions

2456789

Comments

  • arsnnarsnn Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Op you describe a dynamic that mostly happens in pvp themepark games.

    I would expect it to turn out more like in sandbox mmo (such as eve), where communities have local agency and content is widely distributed and not easy to access due to travel times.
  • GithalGithal Member
    arkileo wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    I would say: bring scaling aoe spells that the more targets the spell hit the bigger the dmg.
    So if you hit 1 target the spell would deal 300 for example. If the same spell hit 5 targets, it will deal 1k dmg to each of the targets. IF it hit 50 players it will one shot them all. GG now there are no mega zergs on the battlefield, and the positioning of players will be important

    Or can be balanced if needed that this increase dmg takes effect if you hit more than 10 targets. So if you hit from 1 to 9 targets the dmg is 300. Then the more above 10 you hit the bigger the dmg

    @NyceGaming made a similar argument in his recent video. I'm not totally against it as a means to disperse zergs, but I think it would just cause a shift in tactics rather than the total defeat of large guilds.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5KGE2yITbo

    Well if 1 of the zergs out there manages to keep their players in good positions all the time without people breaking the ranks(which will cause instant wipe from a mass spell) and still keep people in approximately close range since else they will be fighting 10% of the zerg vs other group. Then i would say this zerg deserves to exist. But i am pretty sure that 99% of the zergs wont manage to do anything
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Adding AoE spells that increase damage based on how many targets are in the area as a means to get rid of zergs is just swaping one low skill play for another.

    If the idea is to get rid of low skill play, then it isn't ever going to work. if the idea isn't to get rid of low skill play, then it is pointless to implement.
  • DimitraeosDimitraeos Member
    edited July 20
    Noaani wrote: »
    Adding AoE spells that increase damage based on how many targets are in the area as a means to get rid of zergs is just swaping one low skill play for another.

    If the idea is to get rid of low skill play, then it isn't ever going to work. if the idea isn't to get rid of low skill play, then it is pointless to implement.

    No it just punishes large groups of players that arent coordinated. Think of it as a "zerg tax". Should numerical superiority be a valid strategy? Of course. Should you have to be wary of things that can counterract it? Yes. That's the point of anti-zerg, ant-deathball type mechanics like having a handful of scaling AoE damage abilities (or like ive suggested, items like mines, grenades, bombs, etc).

    This doesn't mean EVERY skill is like this, it just means that the tools for this should exist somewhere. If they dont, then there is no scenario where zergs aren't at a potential risk to their zerging.
    "Divinity is not just Love, Devotion or Purpose. Divinity is the hammer which we use to crush Corruption."
    l4nvaryf9xpf.png
  • DimitraeosDimitraeos Member
    edited July 20
    Githal wrote: »
    arkileo wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    I would say: bring scaling aoe spells that the more targets the spell hit the bigger the dmg.
    So if you hit 1 target the spell would deal 300 for example. If the same spell hit 5 targets, it will deal 1k dmg to each of the targets. IF it hit 50 players it will one shot them all. GG now there are no mega zergs on the battlefield, and the positioning of players will be important

    Or can be balanced if needed that this increase dmg takes effect if you hit more than 10 targets. So if you hit from 1 to 9 targets the dmg is 300. Then the more above 10 you hit the bigger the dmg

    @NyceGaming made a similar argument in his recent video. I'm not totally against it as a means to disperse zergs, but I think it would just cause a shift in tactics rather than the total defeat of large guilds.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5KGE2yITbo

    Well if 1 of the zergs out there manages to keep their players in good positions all the time without people breaking the ranks(which will cause instant wipe from a mass spell) and still keep people in approximately close range since else they will be fighting 10% of the zerg vs other group. Then i would say this zerg deserves to exist. But i am pretty sure that 99% of the zergs wont manage to do anything

    Good, that should be the case. If a zerg doesnt work to coordinate its mass numbers, then they should be punished by players who utilize anti-zerg mechanics like mentioned in the video.

    Its similar to how it works in real warfare: If you overconcetrate and overcommit your forces, you risk losing them all at once. That should absolutely be a consideration for people commanding large groups of players.
    "Divinity is not just Love, Devotion or Purpose. Divinity is the hammer which we use to crush Corruption."
    l4nvaryf9xpf.png
  • NyceGamingNyceGaming Member, Alpha Two
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Adding AoE spells that increase damage based on how many targets are in the area as a means to get rid of zergs is just swaping one low skill play for another.

    If the idea is to get rid of low skill play, then it isn't ever going to work. if the idea isn't to get rid of low skill play, then it is pointless to implement.

    No it just punishes large groups of players that arent coordinated. Think of it as a "zerg tax". Should numerical superiority be a valid strategy? Of course. Should you have to be wary of things that can counterract it? Yes. That's the point of anti-zerg, ant-deathball type mechanics like having a handful of scaling AoE damage abilities (or like ive suggested, items like mines, grenades, bombs, etc).

    This doesn't mean EVERY skill is like this, it just means that the tools for this should exist somewhere. If they dont, then there is no scenario where zergs aren't at a potential risk to their zerging.
    Someone understands this. Great take. Well said and thank you for respectfully not jumping to extremes.
  • RhoklawRhoklaw Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited July 20
    I'm confused... since factions doesn't fix the problem you're describing. Whether you have factions or not, zergs can still exist, just in a different form. Thankfully, Intrepid have already targeted this issue by giving smaller guilds greater rewards in regards to guild perks, in order to balance things out. So folks are able to host large guilds, should they need to, but smaller guilds will garner more benefits.

    You will also have alliances in Ashes, but if every guild decides to join the mega guild, than that's a community issue, not a game mechanics issue. More than likely, due to the size of the world in Ashes, you won't have one guild ruling the entire server. It's never going to happen.

    EDIT: Eve Online is a wonderful example of this. While Eve Online does in fact have factions, it's not designed in a way that factions prevent a corporation from occupying or owning sections of space from another.

    ekge14a9spc6.png
  • NyceGaming wrote: »
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Adding AoE spells that increase damage based on how many targets are in the area as a means to get rid of zergs is just swaping one low skill play for another.

    If the idea is to get rid of low skill play, then it isn't ever going to work. if the idea isn't to get rid of low skill play, then it is pointless to implement.

    No it just punishes large groups of players that arent coordinated. Think of it as a "zerg tax". Should numerical superiority be a valid strategy? Of course. Should you have to be wary of things that can counterract it? Yes. That's the point of anti-zerg, ant-deathball type mechanics like having a handful of scaling AoE damage abilities (or like ive suggested, items like mines, grenades, bombs, etc).

    This doesn't mean EVERY skill is like this, it just means that the tools for this should exist somewhere. If they dont, then there is no scenario where zergs aren't at a potential risk to their zerging.
    Someone understands this. Great take. Well said and thank you for respectfully not jumping to extremes.

    OH so you just want everyone dropping BIG DUMB AOES with NO SKILLL?>>>??? /s
    "Divinity is not just Love, Devotion or Purpose. Divinity is the hammer which we use to crush Corruption."
    l4nvaryf9xpf.png
  • SengardenSengarden Member, Alpha Two
    Sounds like there aren’t enough people willing to step up and be strong leaders, so you want the game to write some fictional, inspirational leaders to help define how you engage with the world. I’ll admit, most guild leaders aren’t exactly fantasy novel kings and warchief’s. But people are going to have to have some fun and rally behind a unique cause and community to enjoy this game’s potential. I think guilds will have player caps, no? If they do, then all you need to do is get a collection of a few other guilds to fight against their domineering behavior. Get inspired, communicate, form alliances, etc.
  • LudulluLudullu Member, Alpha Two
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    That should absolutely be a consideration for people commanding large groups of players.
    NyceGaming wrote: »
    Someone understands this. Great take. Well said and thank you for respectfully not jumping to extremes.
    A question to both of you. What do you consider a "large group of players"?

    Ashes will have body collision, so it'll be physically impossible to fit more than a set number of people into an aoe (unless it's a persistent effect on the ground), and I'd imagine that number would be at most ~2 parties worth of people, which is nowhere near to being a large group.

    But if aoes scale so much that they can nearly oneshot 1-2 parties - day-to-day pvp will devolve into aoe flinging, rather than good strategic fights.

    And if you're ok with parties being wiped out by singular aoes - how do you expect siegers to breach gates/holes in walls/corridors? If a single aoe can stop a gathering of even just 15 people in one place, how do you expect 500v500 sieges to progress, when the attacking side gets wiped out as soon as they approach the walls?
  • DimitraeosDimitraeos Member
    edited July 20
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    That should absolutely be a consideration for people commanding large groups of players.
    NyceGaming wrote: »
    Someone understands this. Great take. Well said and thank you for respectfully not jumping to extremes.
    A question to both of you. What do you consider a "large group of players"?

    Ashes will have body collision, so it'll be physically impossible to fit more than a set number of people into an aoe (unless it's a persistent effect on the ground), and I'd imagine that number would be at most ~2 parties worth of people, which is nowhere near to being a large group.

    But if aoes scale so much that they can nearly oneshot 1-2 parties - day-to-day pvp will devolve into aoe flinging, rather than good strategic fights.

    And if you're ok with parties being wiped out by singular aoes - how do you expect siegers to breach gates/holes in walls/corridors? If a single aoe can stop a gathering of even just 15 people in one place, how do you expect 500v500 sieges to progress, when the attacking side gets wiped out as soon as they approach the walls?

    Nikr the contrarian strikes again!

    Not gonna rehash this argument from months ago because you're just jumping to extreme conclusions again, ironically exactly what our posts above pointed out predicted.

    " oneshot 1-2 parties"

    "devolve into aoe flinging" (lmao I posted a satirical version of this argument/response like 2 comments up, saw it coming)

    When none of this is what we are advocating for.

    Its simple: if you want to take advantage of greater numbers, then you have to do the work to coordinate them to prevent getting skull-fucked by a enemy that is prepared to leverage certain mechanics that punish overconcentration of forces
    "Divinity is not just Love, Devotion or Purpose. Divinity is the hammer which we use to crush Corruption."
    l4nvaryf9xpf.png
  • LudulluLudullu Member, Alpha Two
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    When none of this is what we are advocating for. Its simple: if you want to take advantage of greater numbers, then you have to do the work to coordinate them to prevent getting skull-fucked by a enemy that is prepared to leverage certain mechanics that punish overconcentration of forces
    Yes, and that overconcentration is a very vague term that doesn't really apply to what Ashes is doing :)
  • Dimitraeos wrote: »
    When none of this is what we are advocating for. Its simple: if you want to take advantage of greater numbers, then you have to do the work to coordinate them to prevent getting skull-fucked by a enemy that is prepared to leverage certain mechanics that punish overconcentration of forces
    Yes, and that overconcentration is a very vague term that doesn't really apply to what Ashes is doing :)

    BDO had bodyblocking, and you still had deathball zergs. Ashes has bodyblocking, and without a handful of anti-zerg tools, will also have deathball zergs. Real simple.
    "Divinity is not just Love, Devotion or Purpose. Divinity is the hammer which we use to crush Corruption."
    l4nvaryf9xpf.png
  • deathwishdeathwish Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Laetitian wrote: »
    Make more of an effort to drum up the opposition. Engage in politics. Make alliances against superpowers, instead of becoming a superpower. Encourage other players to engage in more manageable, personally rewarding goals than "controlling" the entire realm as a mere underling to their big boss alliance leader.

    None of that actually happens in G v G. It's a race to control the most important nodes and use them to out-gear your opposition. I wish what you described would happen but it just doesn't. People these days won't give MMOs time or a chance. They will sooner jump ship to another MMO than try to play the politics game.

  • VeeshanVeeshan Member, Alpha Two
    edited July 20
    You make your own faction?, typically you node will be ur faction along with guild/allies.
  • deathwishdeathwish Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    A question to the faction lovers. What makes you believe you'd get even the tiniest bit of content if there's factions in the game? Do you think some strong guild will suddenly decide to let you take content simply because you're from the same faction?

    Also, isn't NW literally a faction-based game? And wasn't AA the same (which leads me to believe that AA2 would be as well)? How in the hell are they a good example for this argument?

    NW was a guild vs guild game. If your guild didn't control the center of the map, Everfall, you didn't get all the tax revenue which was used to upgrade everything to max. It was a massive unfair advantage in PvP and everyone wanted to be in your guild to get the benefits it brought.
  • deathwishdeathwish Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited July 20
    But like I said, I don't think that discussion is worthwhile, because Ashes won't be a faction-based game, and there are better solutions to find that might actually be applied in Ashes.

    Trying to reinvent the wheel and hoping by some miracle it works out is just pure gambling. Where is the proof of concept?

  • DimitraeosDimitraeos Member
    edited July 20
    deathwish wrote: »
    But like I said, I don't think that discussion is worthwhile, because Ashes won't be a faction-based game, and there are better solutions to find that might actually be applied in Ashes.

    Trying to reinvent the wheel and hoping by some miracle it works out is just pure gambling. Where is the proof of concept?

    Baselessly reinventing the wheel just to stake out an arbitrary contrarian opinion is Nikr's specialty 😂

    Welcome to the Ashes forums sir
    "Divinity is not just Love, Devotion or Purpose. Divinity is the hammer which we use to crush Corruption."
    l4nvaryf9xpf.png
  • deathwishdeathwish Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    tautau wrote: »
    1. AoC should be different, not trying to imitate other games and thus split that part of the player base.
    2. AoC's plan of having players create their own, voluntary, factions of node and guild-based player groups is both an innovative and much more fun approach
    3. This one is just my opinion, but I find faction based games to be rather childish, as if the game company has to tell me who my friends and enemies are since they don't seem to think that I can make that decision myself
    4. Some players would prefer not to have an innate in game enemy. While they may end up with enemies in AoC, at least they have a chance at not having enemies, while a faction-based game forces them to.

    1. There's nothing wrong with using what works and has been successful.
    2. How do you know it's fun? What are you even basing that off of?
    3. Being able to tell enemies and friends apart with ease is just good UI design.
    4. Those players probably shouldn't be playing a "PvP" MMO.
  • VeeshanVeeshan Member, Alpha Two
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    When none of this is what we are advocating for. Its simple: if you want to take advantage of greater numbers, then you have to do the work to coordinate them to prevent getting skull-fucked by a enemy that is prepared to leverage certain mechanics that punish overconcentration of forces
    Yes, and that overconcentration is a very vague term that doesn't really apply to what Ashes is doing :)

    BDO had bodyblocking, and you still had deathball zergs. Ashes has bodyblocking, and without a handful of anti-zerg tools, will also have deathball zergs. Real simple.

    Reason death balls exist is because in almost every single game AoE have a target cap usually 5 players which are chosen at random, Lack of good AoE option leave to boring gameplay which tend to be zerg balling it up since u cant be focused down alot of the cases.

    Some games that didnt realy have the deathballs ive played was Darkfall and that was due to friendly fire and relativly decent AoE skill that were not target capped. Crowfall was another one that for a single seige/war before zerg guild cried and it got nerf. With that one there was a statue u could build in a guild city and during seige time it make every player zap anyone within 5m of them for a considerable amount of dmg every 3 seconds friend of foe, whioch force people to spread was actualy my best seige in that game but devs removed it when the zerg guild cried on the forums about it -.-

    TLDR: AoE need to be effective at clumps but less effective against single targets so like single target spell does 60% more dmg than an aoe skill so to get your value u need to hit 3 targets at a time kinda deal.
  • deathwishdeathwish Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    arkileo wrote: »
    I disagree with the assessment that "because it didn't work in x game, it won't work in y game"

    Ashes is a systems-heavy game. If it devolves into 1-guild dominance, then I imagine they'll introduce some system to negate that. Just because x game didn't feel the need or spend the effort to find a solution, doesn't mean Intrepid won't.

    I'm not opposed to multiple factions, but like others have said, I think it's way too late. Plus, depending on how they're implemented, they can have the big downside requiring the devs to make content that only ~50% of the players will see, thereby reducing the amount of content available to everyone.

    For an MMO launch there is a very small window to retain players before they get bored and move on to the next game. If the MMO is made for the top 5% of guilds than it's already dead after everyone realizes they're not going to be able to catch up. Why try to fix a huge problem after launch when you can prevent it from even happening to begin with?
  • deathwishdeathwish Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Githal wrote: »
    I would say: bring scaling aoe spells that the more targets the spell hit the bigger the dmg.
    So if you hit 1 target the spell would deal 300 for example. If the same spell hit 5 targets, it will deal 1k dmg to each of the targets. IF it hit 50 players it will one shot them all. GG now there are no mega zergs on the battlefield, and the positioning of players will be important

    Or can be balanced if needed that this increase dmg takes effect if you hit more than 10 targets. So if you hit from 1 to 9 targets the dmg is 300. Then the more above 10 you hit the bigger the dmg

    Scaling is very important, hopefully they have included it in their design but I'm not holding my breath until I see it.
  • Veeshan wrote: »
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    When none of this is what we are advocating for. Its simple: if you want to take advantage of greater numbers, then you have to do the work to coordinate them to prevent getting skull-fucked by a enemy that is prepared to leverage certain mechanics that punish overconcentration of forces
    Yes, and that overconcentration is a very vague term that doesn't really apply to what Ashes is doing :)

    BDO had bodyblocking, and you still had deathball zergs. Ashes has bodyblocking, and without a handful of anti-zerg tools, will also have deathball zergs. Real simple.

    Reason death balls exist is because in almost every single game AoE have a target cap usually 5 players which are chosen at random, Lack of good AoE option leave to boring gameplay which tend to be zerg balling it up since u cant be focused down alot of the cases.

    Some games that didnt realy have the deathballs ive played was Darkfall and that was due to friendly fire and relativly decent AoE skill that were not target capped. Crowfall was another one that for a single seige/war before zerg guild cried and it got nerf. With that one there was a statue u could build in a guild city and during seige time it make every player zap anyone within 5m of them for a considerable amount of dmg every 3 seconds friend of foe, whioch force people to spread was actualy my best seige in that game but devs removed it when the zerg guild cried on the forums about it -.-

    TLDR: AoE need to be effective at clumps but less effective against single targets so like single target spell does 60% more dmg than an aoe skill so to get your value u need to hit 3 targets at a time kinda deal.

    100% agreed and hence mine, @NyceGaming and other's suggestions regarding aoe abilities, scaling AoEs, etc
    "Divinity is not just Love, Devotion or Purpose. Divinity is the hammer which we use to crush Corruption."
    l4nvaryf9xpf.png
  • deathwishdeathwish Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    senna wrote: »
    I'd be really impressed if a single guild manages to control and gatekeep the entirety of a 10,000 player server, that's some pretty hardcore dedication.

    Archeage, a game that Ashes intends to mirror a good number of design philosophies from, had a faction system that in no way prevented mega guilds or players intentionally gating content from others. Large guilds are inevitable to pop up regardless of faction, and the main factor for whether a faction succeeds or fails in Archeage is what amenities are reasonably available to the faction. Pirates were intentionally doomed to fail due to their position not allowing much PvE content outside of Auroria and other neutral zones. Stable factions designed by the developer will always have these issues to some extent, and whichever faction has the "best" access to relevant resources is where many competitive guilds flock, exacerbating the issue you seem to be trying to address rather than solving it. The reality is that factions only fully prevent mega guilds if the factions are so small by design that you can't even have a mega guild in them, which is obviously not fun or interesting for anyone.

    On a separate note, as Aszkalon stated, the way nodes and many other systems in-game are intended to work is as factions. Your allegiances lie primarily with your node, with your node members most of the time being considered as allies to you, and things like guild affiliation, religion, etc. impact who you are friends with as well. With this being said, you pretty much have factions in game already, thus solving the general gist of what you want. Join a node structure with players and resources you want, and you probably won't struggle nearly as much as you seem to believe. As it turns out, being in a node structure with large and successful guilds probably means you will have a good time doing to content you want.

    Goonswarm Federation is a pretty good example of a single guild gatekeeping.
  • CROW3CROW3 Member, Alpha Two
    edited July 20
    For as much thought as you’ve put into your argument(s), I’m pretty sure Steven and Intrepid have considered this extensively. The lack of factions isn’t accidental.

    I’d rather (and have already) invest in Intrepid’s intentional core design then a game swayed by this month’s prevaling winds (cough NW).
    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • GithalGithal Member
    edited July 20
    deathwish wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    I would say: bring scaling aoe spells that the more targets the spell hit the bigger the dmg.
    So if you hit 1 target the spell would deal 300 for example. If the same spell hit 5 targets, it will deal 1k dmg to each of the targets. IF it hit 50 players it will one shot them all. GG now there are no mega zergs on the battlefield, and the positioning of players will be important

    Or can be balanced if needed that this increase dmg takes effect if you hit more than 10 targets. So if you hit from 1 to 9 targets the dmg is 300. Then the more above 10 you hit the bigger the dmg

    Scaling is very important, hopefully they have included it in their design but I'm not holding my breath until I see it.

    They can just put 1 skill like the living bomb of fire mage in wow. That hits 1 target, the target explodes hitting all nearby targets and putting the living bomb on all that were hit. Then all explode and they ignite new bombs on every new target. With mega zergs till the players split all will be with bombs.

    But in wow had some limitations that the second targets with the bomb cant transfer it. and also till bomb explode was too long time, like 5 seconds. There need to be no limitations, and bomb explode every 1 sec
  • GithalGithal Member
    edited July 20
    Githal wrote: »
    deathwish wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    I would say: bring scaling aoe spells that the more targets the spell hit the bigger the dmg.
    So if you hit 1 target the spell would deal 300 for example. If the same spell hit 5 targets, it will deal 1k dmg to each of the targets. IF it hit 50 players it will one shot them all. GG now there are no mega zergs on the battlefield, and the positioning of players will be important

    Or can be balanced if needed that this increase dmg takes effect if you hit more than 10 targets. So if you hit from 1 to 9 targets the dmg is 300. Then the more above 10 you hit the bigger the dmg

    Scaling is very important, hopefully they have included it in their design but I'm not holding my breath until I see it.

    They can just put 1 skill like the living bomb of fire mage in wow. That hits 1 target, the target explodes hitting all nearby targets and putting the living bomb on all that were hit. Then all explode and they ignite new bombs on every new target. With mega zergs till the players split all will be with bombs.

    But in wow had some limitations that the second targets with the bomb cant transfer it. and also till bomb explode was too long time, like 5 seconds. There need to be no limitations, and bomb explode every 1 sec

    Like in order for this to be not that OP even in smaller groups, THe first bomb can explode after 5 seconds (but is uncleansable). does little dmg. but every next explosion deals bit more dmg than previous. So even if 8 players dont react on the bomb and all end up with it. it will still deal them like 10% of the hp per bomb, which when the targets split each player will take 10% of his hp dmg. And if a mage blink + put bomb in some of the inner players in a zerg, they cant do a sh*t with the collision restrictions

    You may even put some WALLS from the tank class. to make sure the zerg cant split
  • EndowedEndowed Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    The biggest concern of AoC since the onset - zergs.

    Tho hacks/cheats are right there.
  • VeeshanVeeshan Member, Alpha Two
    edited July 20
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    Veeshan wrote: »
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    Dimitraeos wrote: »
    When none of this is what we are advocating for. Its simple: if you want to take advantage of greater numbers, then you have to do the work to coordinate them to prevent getting skull-fucked by a enemy that is prepared to leverage certain mechanics that punish overconcentration of forces
    Yes, and that overconcentration is a very vague term that doesn't really apply to what Ashes is doing :)

    BDO had bodyblocking, and you still had deathball zergs. Ashes has bodyblocking, and without a handful of anti-zerg tools, will also have deathball zergs. Real simple.

    Reason death balls exist is because in almost every single game AoE have a target cap usually 5 players which are chosen at random, Lack of good AoE option leave to boring gameplay which tend to be zerg balling it up since u cant be focused down alot of the cases.

    Some games that didnt realy have the deathballs ive played was Darkfall and that was due to friendly fire and relativly decent AoE skill that were not target capped. Crowfall was another one that for a single seige/war before zerg guild cried and it got nerf. With that one there was a statue u could build in a guild city and during seige time it make every player zap anyone within 5m of them for a considerable amount of dmg every 3 seconds friend of foe, whioch force people to spread was actualy my best seige in that game but devs removed it when the zerg guild cried on the forums about it -.-

    TLDR: AoE need to be effective at clumps but less effective against single targets so like single target spell does 60% more dmg than an aoe skill so to get your value u need to hit 3 targets at a time kinda deal.

    100% agreed and hence mine, @NyceGaming and other's suggestions regarding aoe abilities, scaling AoEs, etc

    Also depends on AoE function too for example u could debuff a target and then they shock anyone near them every 2 seconds so it causes people to scatter or take heavy dmg.
    also an aoe version that puts a ring around everyone that after 3 seconds if there within x distance of somone else effected by the ring from the same spell cast they will detonate doing decent dmg.

    The mechanics are simple enough to avoid so you can have them do more dmg than normal AoE skills because they are easier to avoid and u can also have other classes synergise well with this for example you can have other classes might have an aoe root that u can time up to maximise the dmg output or say a tank able to knock people back to try and push people together. i just wouldnt give the same class the same spell so u cant do the combo alone. Like imagine the ring one and then being a tank in the situation where u can pull somone too you. You could charge somone with the bomb debuff and laso another one with the debuff into them to blow it up i think this makes good gameplay.

    im all for devistating aoe combos aslong as the devastating combo cant be performed by the same player.
  • OtrOtr Member, Alpha Two
    There are 6 factions in the game: 5 metropolis nations and the 20 neutral nodes outside them.
Sign In or Register to comment.