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.

Ranged Mobs: Impossible to Counter if you are in their attack range

124»

Comments

  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    edited September 30
    Caeryl wrote: »
    And since the main audience for this game are people who stuck with MMOs instead of switching to Action RPGs, it makes zero sense to prioritize the niche part of the audience who wants elden ring as an mmo

    Literally no one is asking for that. It was one example given to someone who claimed (very incorrectly) that 'real' RPGs don't use active defenses.

    You also seem to have some warped perception of what an RPG is. Role-Play Game, aka you are the one playing the role of a character. The character isn't playing the game for you.

    If your reflexes suck, then obviously you shouldn't be trying to make your RPG character an evasive rogue that dodges everything because you don't have the capability to embody that.

    Fighters have combos, Mages have synergistic skill orders. Both of those are skill expressions determined by the player, and both are good to have. Active evasion is just another system like that.

    Almost everything in this post is incorrect. You are - at best - talking about some games you have played, and presenting them as the only way games should be designed.

    If a players reactions being a little slower means they shouldn't play a rogue in an RPG, what does that mean for people that play spellcasters?

    My spellcasting ability is dismal at best, yet I almost always play casters as my main. Am I doing it wrong, or is it simply a case that our characters in RPG's have the abilities, not the players?

    The answer is the latter - RPG's are not about players reaction skills or anything like that, it is about the way the player has built the character.

    Where you would be right is if you said that different games require different things from players for different classes. Some classes in some games require players to use many abilities very quickly, and so a player that has issues with their hand may have trouble. Some classes in some games require players use abilities a little slower, but that they use the correct ability at the correct time. This may be more suited to someone with limited hand movement, but someone that is indecisive may not be as good at this class in this game.

    It is the notion that rogue players must have fast reactions that is absolutely, completely and totally incorrect on your part. One of the most objectively incorrect things I have seen on these forums.

    I could see it if you said "this is how I prefer games", but you are stating it as if it is how it must be, despite there being dozens (hundreds) of games built on that specifically not being the case.

    Again, you are objectively, factually, demonstriobly incorrect here.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited September 30
    Caeryl wrote: »
    You also seem to have some warped perception of what an RPG is. Role-Play Game, aka you are the one playing the role of a character. The character isn't playing the game for you.

    If your reflexes suck, then obviously you shouldn't be trying to make your RPG character an evasive rogue that dodges everything because you don't have the capability to embody that.

    Fighters have combos, Mages have synergistic skill orders. Both of those are skill expressions determined by the player, and both are good to have. Active evasion is just another system like that.
    Playing the role of the character means that the player is relying on the stats of the character rather than on the IRL traits of the gamer to defeat challenges.
    If the gamer's reflexes suck, they should build up the stats of their character to have god-like reflexes.
    That is really the entire point of an RPG.
    Which is significantly different than a BR or a Shooter - which do rely heavily on the reflexes of the gamer rather than on the stats of their character.

    And, yeah, American Football and Rugby aren't less challenging and less skillful than Soccer, just because you can use your hands more often in those games rather than relying mostly on your feet in Soccer.
    They just have different rules.
    Active Block and Active Dodge are not really an RPG. Including them makes a game more like American Football than Soccer. Doesn't mean American Football sucks. Doesn't mean that Rugby sucks.
    But if what you want to play is Soccer... people advocating to be able to use hands more because that's fun in American Football and Rugby.... The Soccer players are gonna be "meh"... it's OK not to have that.

    I like a bit of Action Combat in my MMORPGs.
    But... that's low on my interests.
  • CaerylCaeryl Member, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    nanfoodle wrote: »
    IMO this is best done by AI. NPCs should switch target because they are seen as a great threat. Like switching targets because the Cleric healed someone. Mage being the glass cannon. See them as the bigger threat. There should be reasons an NPC switches target and it should seem organic like we are playibc players.

    Don't see how this is relevant to the topic but..

    NPCs will be coded to adjust targeting based on Threat thresholds, but they can't change targets 'like players' because then Threat as a mechanic wouldn't exist.

    Players will prioritize enemy damage dealers over a tank, but NPCs will always prioritize whoever Taunts them (barring severely mismanaged Threat)
  • AszkalonAszkalon Member, Alpha Two
    Caeryl wrote: »
    If your reflexes suck, then obviously you shouldn't be trying to make your RPG character an evasive rogue that dodges everything because you don't have the capability to embody that.

    Fighters have combos, Mages have synergistic skill orders. Both of those are skill expressions determined by the player, and both are good to have. Active evasion is just another system like that.

    This is why i like it when You have something like "Reflectors" like in WoW Vanilla - or some smol' Abilities, Items, Trinkets - etc. - that You can ignite/use in that ONE. CERTAIN. MOMENT. where one powerful Spell or a decisive Barrage of magic Attacks could hit You,

    effectively resisting something that might bring You down otherwise - and in some Cases turn the Tides of Battle at a very crucial point in Battle. >;-) . :mrgreen:
    a50whcz343yn.png
    ✓ Occasional Roleplayer
    ✓ Kinda starting to look for a Guild right now. (German)
  • nanfoodlenanfoodle Member, Founder, Kickstarter, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Caeryl wrote: »
    nanfoodle wrote: »
    IMO this is best done by AI. NPCs should switch target because they are seen as a great threat. Like switching targets because the Cleric healed someone. Mage being the glass cannon. See them as the bigger threat. There should be reasons an NPC switches target and it should seem organic like we are playibc players.

    Don't see how this is relevant to the topic but..

    NPCs will be coded to adjust targeting based on Threat thresholds, but they can't change targets 'like players' because then Threat as a mechanic wouldn't exist.

    Players will prioritize enemy damage dealers over a tank, but NPCs will always prioritize whoever Taunts them (barring severely mismanaged Threat)

    Guess I was not clear. The ways I listed was why an NPC should switch target. Not because you walked 10 feet to the left. You upset an NPC there needs to be an AI reason it would switch. From threat level to changing targets because its a tactic that makes sense. Like lets kill the healer.
  • CaerylCaeryl Member, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    nanfoodle wrote: »
    Caeryl wrote: »
    nanfoodle wrote: »
    IMO this is best done by AI. NPCs should switch target because they are seen as a great threat. Like switching targets because the Cleric healed someone. Mage being the glass cannon. See them as the bigger threat. There should be reasons an NPC switches target and it should seem organic like we are playibc players.

    Don't see how this is relevant to the topic but..

    NPCs will be coded to adjust targeting based on Threat thresholds, but they can't change targets 'like players' because then Threat as a mechanic wouldn't exist.

    Players will prioritize enemy damage dealers over a tank, but NPCs will always prioritize whoever Taunts them (barring severely mismanaged Threat)

    Guess I was not clear. The ways I listed was why an NPC should switch target. Not because you walked 10 feet to the left. You upset an NPC there needs to be an AI reason it would switch. From threat level to changing targets because its a tactic that makes sense. Like lets kill the healer.

    Sorry but I genuinely don't understand what you're trying to say here. ESL?

    NPCs can't be 'smart' because they have to respect Taunts.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Caeryl wrote: »
    nanfoodle wrote: »
    Caeryl wrote: »
    nanfoodle wrote: »
    IMO this is best done by AI. NPCs should switch target because they are seen as a great threat. Like switching targets because the Cleric healed someone. Mage being the glass cannon. See them as the bigger threat. There should be reasons an NPC switches target and it should seem organic like we are playibc players.

    Don't see how this is relevant to the topic but..

    NPCs will be coded to adjust targeting based on Threat thresholds, but they can't change targets 'like players' because then Threat as a mechanic wouldn't exist.

    Players will prioritize enemy damage dealers over a tank, but NPCs will always prioritize whoever Taunts them (barring severely mismanaged Threat)

    Guess I was not clear. The ways I listed was why an NPC should switch target. Not because you walked 10 feet to the left. You upset an NPC there needs to be an AI reason it would switch. From threat level to changing targets because its a tactic that makes sense. Like lets kill the healer.

    Sorry but I genuinely don't understand what you're trying to say here. ESL?

    NPCs can't be 'smart' because they have to respect Taunts.

    This completely depends on how threat works.

    Generally, taunts generate straight threat, and 1 point of damage = 1 point of threat. This obviously means the tank needs to generate more threat+damage than the made produces damage. However, healing also generates threat - and this can be anywhere from almost nothing (have yet to see actually nothing, but it may exist in some game somewhere), up to 1 point of healing = 50 points of threat (I have only seen high amounts in games where different mobs have different ratios of converting healing, damage, buffs and debuffs in to threat).

    So, even with taunts, there is still scope for mobs to target other characters. If a mob is set to really hate it when his rivals are healed, a healer may well find themselves in trouble. If a mob really hates fire, a mage casting fire spells may find themselves in trouble.

    I don't expect Ashes to do this kind of thing, because it's what I would consider advanced PvE design, and Steven just doesn't seem to understand that PvE can be advanced.

    So, TL:DR, what nanfoodle talked about can be achieved using the games threat system. However, I fail to see how it relates to the topic at hand.
Sign In or Register to comment.