My PvE combat impressions so far: Enemy numbers, enemy type variety and group combat complexity
ThevoicestHeVoIcEs
Member
I watched some of the group content which was shown off during archetype reveals and reworks. I suspect these impressions might be extended to single player levelling experience.
TL;DR version to engage some of you: Atm a lot of those fights feel VERY semi, with a group of players pulling one mob and beating at it until its dead. This is NOT a good template for interesting and exciting PvE gameplay. Also we have all those RPG systems to leverage and at the moment it seems only the HP bar is utilised in combat
Whilst this was not true in all footage, one thing stuck out to me. In too many instances it was a case of player group outnumbering the NPC enemies, instead of other way around. Nothing feeds that power fantasy of facing overwhelming odds like 4 (to be later 8) players beating up that...1 poor NPC /sarcasm
Could we get these ratios reversed?
Obviously HP, resistances and damage output values have to be adjusted, but that would allow players to feel that sense of that "epic" fight. facing a real threat. This would open up the combat more, as you have to pay attention / manage multiple threats, utilise more abilities from your kit, whatever you are talking AoE damage, CC, weapons with cleave attacks etc.
Mind I have no problem with some fights being multiple players vs few powerful elite NPCs, but I really would like to see far more scenarios where the player(s) faces larger groups of enemies.
I feel that especially in the group content, players should face PvE enemy groups. Those groups should probably be also comprised of different enemy types:
This should feed into the idea of players using their whole ability kit, strategizing in larger fights which enemies they should taken down first, disable first etc.
TL;DR version to engage some of you: Atm a lot of those fights feel VERY semi, with a group of players pulling one mob and beating at it until its dead. This is NOT a good template for interesting and exciting PvE gameplay. Also we have all those RPG systems to leverage and at the moment it seems only the HP bar is utilised in combat
Whilst this was not true in all footage, one thing stuck out to me. In too many instances it was a case of player group outnumbering the NPC enemies, instead of other way around. Nothing feeds that power fantasy of facing overwhelming odds like 4 (to be later 8) players beating up that...1 poor NPC /sarcasm
Could we get these ratios reversed?
Obviously HP, resistances and damage output values have to be adjusted, but that would allow players to feel that sense of that "epic" fight. facing a real threat. This would open up the combat more, as you have to pay attention / manage multiple threats, utilise more abilities from your kit, whatever you are talking AoE damage, CC, weapons with cleave attacks etc.
Mind I have no problem with some fights being multiple players vs few powerful elite NPCs, but I really would like to see far more scenarios where the player(s) faces larger groups of enemies.
I feel that especially in the group content, players should face PvE enemy groups. Those groups should probably be also comprised of different enemy types:
- tanks / bruiser / disruptor type enemies with some CC abilities,
- melee/ranged dps
- disablers (imagine enemies throwing nets at players, sleep spells, effects which could be dispelt by other players, or require getting close to a player to get them out from a net quicker than if they had to do it by themselves for example?)
- swarms of weak enemies (think some poorly equipped weak goblins, basic skeletons etc.)
- ranged enemies: archers, spear throwers, mage users with both single target and AoE abilities with opportunities for players to interrupt these skills, silence enemies, flanking for rogue characters etc)
- healers, de-buffer style enemies
This should feed into the idea of players using their whole ability kit, strategizing in larger fights which enemies they should taken down first, disable first etc.
3
Comments
I'm totally fine with having a few locations where you can mow down mobs like there's no tomorrow, but that shit shouldn't reward you with any good loot (or anything good within a short amount of time).
Black dessert was flashy but didnt feel like there was any challenge when u just face roll the keyboard and kill 20 mobs at once.
Everquest 1 though every mob was dangerous soloing on my necromancer was a great deal more interesting. Charms NPC have it fight another NPC be ready to root them both when charm breaks if your charmed mob is loosing u need to CC the one it fighting break your charm kill it when it was low for the XP (gotta time it so it dies off 1 spell or it like 2 tap you) find a new mob to charm have it kill the previous one and repeat. you can be literaly juggling 3-5 of these mobs in this way and if u fk up you get 2 tapped by any of them if you miss managed the fight.
AoC seems to be going for a more realistic appoach where your just normal person in the world compared to most MMO these days where your the main character and mobs are just chaff to mow down.
Dont get me wrong though as depraved mention above i suspect there be some ares that have alot of weaker mobs that your mow down but i feel majority of the mobs will be relativly close to your individual power level compared to new MMO's
What I have seen in the tank showcase, and to lesser extended in the most recent citadel / Firebrand showcase, leans too much towards 8 players vs 1-3 very similar enemy types at the time.
Blackrock Guard
Guild Forum Post
I want to be forced, at least in group content, to face group of enemies which have variety of roles, just like players in the game have their own classes. What is more interesting, at least on paper? Facing 10 copy pasted melee enemies, all with 2k of HP and the same basic moves, or a varied group of enemies with different roles in a combat engagement, with some variety to their special abilities. Those enemy roles should push players into direction of actually thinking more about who they should focus first, who disable/silence, and use their kit like abilities to cleanse statuses, disel magic to counter play the mobs' special attacks.
We have seen SOME of that, at least on the concept level, in the footage from the citadel, but those groups of enemies usually were 4 enemies max, with 2 melee unites, 1 archer and 1 caster if I remember correctly. Those groups should be bigger, so should the enemy variety and their ability to use abilities in combat (bow barrage, AoEs, charge, heals, DoTs, CCs etc).
This is part of why having parties of eight seemed strange to me, but the answer will usually be to lowman the content, not to make the NPC groups bigger.
We haven't yet been shown any party content that actually requires 8 players or would even be particularly 'better' with 8 (considering loot and exp distribution).
For me, 2-3 vs 6 feels good, 3v4 is a good feeling when you get it right. Any more on the enemy side than that and what always seems to happen is that the Devs provide enough tools to have one of two things happen:
1) The Tank has an AoE taunt, at which point those 4-6 enemies can be treated as one group that just hits your Tank faster
2) The Bard/Mage has an AoE sleep, so you're still not really fighting more than 1-2 enemies at a time.
Sure, the coordination is fun, but 'having 6 enemies beat on the tank or 4 enemies sleep through the fight until you get to them' I feel doesn't appeal. That said, I don't like 'power fantasy' gameplay of that type, so I don't really know where Ashes is going with this.
Edit: I adjusted the subject a bit to clarify the intent.
It's not complex the way you described, and certainly even less if you add the word "forced," where the group of players you have to deal with has a predetermined size.
I know you'll want to argue against this by saying you simply don't have to give players these tools to streamline the process of dealing with the herd of mobs, but just hear me out first; there's a better way to do this:
What you're suggesting is great for certain stages of dungeons and boss rooms. We already have that, and it will be refined.
But when it comes to regular dungeon stretches, and overland map farming, there are more natural, less rigid, and therefore more engaging ways of creating the challenge you want:
In games I've played where the farming/dungeon-running was difficult and fun, the difficulty was never created by predetermined group sizes.
In fact, all the games that had systems like that (SWTOR and ESO come to mind) had some of the most formulaic PvE of all MMOs I've ever played.
In games with good farming/-dungeon-running, the difficulty was always created by
Modern MMOs have strayed away from this approach to the ridiculous extent. They actively discourage this practice, instead of just putting functional mechanics in place to prevent powerlevelling by higher-level players. Complete waste of potential for letting players find their worthy challenge, imo.
Combine these two factors, and you get a fully authentic solution to difficulty and ad-hoc adjustments of strategies in order to deal with sudden difficult threats. (Or preparation for what may come, though if you hold all your ace abilities back for any eventuality, that's going to reduce your average clear speed, so efficient players have to be able to do both.)
I'm pretty sure what you're getting at is that you want a deeper tactical aspect to the game. Which I agree with.
You shouldn't be able to just walk up and pick one mob (or a group). And face roll till their dead. It should take a bit of planning. Single mobs allow people to just pull one at a time. Where as a group you kind of have to plan more things out.
This is also good because it introduces solo players to the idea of planning out a pull before hand and not just running in and mashing buttons.
Well said! I don't particularly care how they achieve that, but it sounds like a worthy goal.
IMO this would be something they either should do in a dedicated stream in the future or, to get focussed feedback on, tell players in the Alpha 2 explicitely which area they have conceptualized for what size of players so that testers can go into those zones and can evaluate the spot exactly based on that design intent.
As for the mob variety: 100% yes. We need interesting encounters that challenge groups and they should smart enough to sometime break the normal expectations of dumb mobs. An Assassin type Mob should sometime reset his aggro to the tank and try to take out a healer or mage / should stay in camoflage and try to take them out by surprise after the tank engages the visible mobs.
I hope that Intrepid closes the gap between PvP and PvE by making mobs also based on the 64 classes, give them similar or the same skills as one would get from those classes and then top it off with unique abilities based on the nature of the enemy (e.g. a panther could be based on the Rouge and Fighter, paired with unique jumping and running abilities). This would not only speed up the overall development pace but also would allow for PvE and PvP grow closer together so that the jump into PvP doesn't feel as daunting or annoying to PvE players and the jump into PvE doesn't feel as "boring" to mainly PvP players. But again - this is my hope, I don't claim to have ANY information that would indicate or prove that this is the direction we are heading.