Disable Evasion Rating (Physical/Magical Disable Evasion Rating)???

Blaspherian

Azherae wrote: »

In the end, the big problem anyone bringing this up will face is simple.

Intrepid has a specific set of testers and backers who are the 'first line' of input for certain types of change. I definitely am not saying those people are favored, I'm pointing out that since the rest of us never see the input from those persons, and they just 'don't need to engage on forums in the first place', it's not like you can 'have a discussion.

Again, I am not strongly in favor of RNG at least in the sense that I would prefer it to be how @Apok says, but I also know that's not how the community at large felt, from the old threads. It's just that the community is now split into 'those who have the first ear' and 'the rest of the forums'.

So even if the only person in this thread going 'no random CC is fine actually' is Ludullu, that doesn't mean that Intrepid is going to 'get the message that most of their players don't like that' because that's not actually what's happening.

If anything, I'm just bringing up their arguments for the sake of dispelling that perception, but I suppose it could be equally true that everyone left with an interest in this game, even in the Phoenix Initiative group, is also asking them to change the CC/Disable Resist.

Point is that I'm probably gonna stop here, I don't want to 'get a reputation for wanting RNG CC chance' even by accident.

I know what you're getting at, but that's just a bit pessimistic for me. Anything that gets enough attention will garner a response. For me, I was shocked and disappointed to see these stats enter the game. I want this game to live up to it's potential. I couldn't live with myself if I didn't speak up about it. Even if it does fall on deaf ears, into the void.

Blaspherian

Ludullu wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

Yeah but there is a reason people care about one and not the other for most games.

I mean, to me this is the same as "some games don't end pvp once one side manages to land a CC on the opponent". To me, CC usually = a few free extra hits on the opponent. Depending on how high crit dmg scales - that's the same thing. Except CCs have CDs and diminishing returns, while crits only have some resistances and debuffs related to their values (L2 had those too) and, more often than not, the accuracy/evasion stats.

I've seen way more deaths to a lucky crit than I've seen to CCs landing. And this, of course, could just speak to L2's own balance of crit values vs CC length/chances, but that is kinda exactly why my experience makes me think of those two as ultimately the same kind of rng result.

If CCs in Ashes become 100%able, while crit values can be boosted - would that not mean that people will simply go boost those crit values as their main source of power, just as people think that some would boost CC evasion? Except we also have the dodge mechanic, which directly addresses crits' danger, while CCs would be a sure-way to fuck someone over. Which then inevitably goes back to "I just gotta CC them and then I'll win", which brings up the questions of CC breaks, which brings up the question of how many of either should any given archetype have, which brings up questions of mass pvp and DRs, and cleanses, and CDs of all of that.

Though this does bring up a behavior statistics question. What's people's general reaction towards the difference bettween "this CC has 40% chance to land and 3s duration, but we nerfed it to 30% and 2.4s" and "this CC is 100% with 2, but we nerfed it to 1.6s"? I'd imagine that the kneejerk reaction to the latter is "oh shit, that's almost half a second less, that's massive", while the former's might be "ok, both chance and time is less, but not by a lot", while the impact of either went down by 20% (if my math is anywhere near right).

And I think those are the reactions because it's way easier to understand that your assured CC is now directly weaker, while it's harder to realize how truly worse a nerf is when it's done to an unsure subject, with a bigger initial impact (i.e. 3s effect vs 2s).

Or do people react way worse to the less known change than to the known?

I think at a vague, generic level you can compare Crit to CC, in regards to RNG. But that's where it ends. Mechanically, they serve different functions (sometimes similar as in your example) that illicit different responses/outcomes. With Crit being a passive and CC being active, you can't call it an apples to apples comparison.

If you're a crit build and your hits don't crit, your way forward is simple, put out more damage. Or let's say you crit 3 times in a row, your target dies early, nice surprise. At the end of the day it's just extra damage or no extra damage. Doesn't weigh super heavily on your moment to moment decisions.

If you're going in for a CC, you probably have a combo/plan of action to execute to follow up that CC. If that CC is resisted, the feeling is very jarring, as it disrupts your entire plan/thought process up to that point, leaving you feeling CCed yourself. And this is gonna sound dumb, but on multiple occasions I've checked my mouse/keyboard just to make sure it's not hardware failure, because that's exactly how it feels. Like something isn't working properly. It just feels like random removal of player agency. And that's shitty.

I can't wrap my head around how devs/gamers can think this adds to competitive integrity or fun gameplay.

Ludullu

Blaspherian wrote: »

If you're going in for a CC, you probably have a combo/plan of action to execute to follow up that CC. If that CC is resisted, the feeling is very jarring, as it disrupts your entire plan/thought process up to that point, leaving you feeling CCed yourself. And this is gonna sound dumb, but on multiple occasions I've checked my mouse/keyboard just to make sure it's not hardware failure, because that's exactly how it feels. Like something isn't working properly. It just feels like random removal of player agency. And that's shitty.

And, as Azherae said, there's counter-crit effects/builds that would reduce the effectiveness of your crit build. So now you'd need to think of ways of winning w/o crits (or with way weaker ones). Sometimes those ways go so far away from what a class represents, that the entire class turns from a rock against scissors into a paper.

To me, CCs with non-100% chance of landing is the same, because the enemy can build into resistances, while I should be able to build into chance increase (be that waterfall or direct increase of specific CC type). And just as with the crits, some classes might become way weaker against people that managed to build against their exact type of CCs.

But yeah, as I said before, I'm 100% against any generalized CC evasion, because I totally agree that it would become THE meta, cause of fucking course it would - IT'S FUCKING GENERALIZED.

Blaspherian wrote: »

I can't wrap my head around how devs/gamers can think this adds to competitive integrity or fun gameplay.

I think this simply comes down to experiences. In L2's design archer and dagger classes relied highly on their crits to win (archers from basic attacks, daggers from abilities). The game had buffs that would cut down 30% of incoming crit dmg, debuffs that would cut down crit rate and/or dmg (2 different debuffs) by 30/25% respectively, and several super strong party defensive abilities that would make incoming dmg near non-existent.

All those abilities would make life of those classes way harder. Counters to them would consist of buff stealing/cancelling and of precise debuff cleansing.

CCs would have resistance buffs against them and CD prolonging debuffs that would highly reduce their frequency. Counters were the same as above.

But then on top of that you'd have gear-based effects of +-% to the landing rates, while gear itself (and usually its OE values) would be the fully passive counter to incoming dmg.

So, in my experience, both of these things function in the same way, are countered in the same way - all while the fun of gameplay was perceived in the same way as well (I already gave examples of situations I've seen before). And so to me they're fine.

And I was about to add an angry point about the "blanket response to a whole type of attack", but then realized (again) that it's just a mirror effect for evasion as a whole. I think the middle ground compromise that I'd be fine with is if they add an exclusivity branch to the dodge mechanic, where your maneuverability goes waaaaaaay down, but your CC resistance goes up. In other words, make it a conscious choice on the side of the player, whether they want to have more protection against phys effects or magic ones.

BUT I STILL WANT HEIGHTENED RESISTANCES RATHER THAN FULL EVASION AGAINST MAAAAGIC. You can't evade magic, cause it's fucking maaaagic.

Blaspherian

Ludullu wrote: »

So, in my experience, both of these things function in the same way, are countered in the same way - all while the fun of gameplay was perceived in the same way as well (I already gave examples of situations I've seen before). And so to me they're fine.

I think we're crossing our threads a little here, so to speak. As far as Crit vs CC, I'm not debating specifics from other games or hypotheticals of how things could play out in Ashes. I'm just talking fundamental form and function. And I think we're edging towards getting a little away from the main topic but I'll wrap my point up:

Crit and CC can take similar function at times yes, but they are not the same in form. CC is more dynamic. Crit is more linear in its application. Crit is like a fixed blade where CC would be a utility knife.

CC can be used, like you said, to grant you a few more hits (more damage), functioning similarly to Crit. CC can also be used for zone denial, zone acquisition. CC can be used to create an opening for engage or disengage. CC can be used as a pause button to heal, pop defensive CDs, allow time for CDs to refresh, amongst other things.

Simply put, CC has numerous applications. I don't think the same can be said for Crit. I'm not saying Crit isn't valuable, cause it absolutely is, just not in the same way that CC is.

In most games you have Crit Dmg and maybe Crit healing. If you take away the Crit part from happening, you still have the intrinsic value of the Damage or the Heal, you just didn't get the passive bonus to it's value. Whether or not the Crit happens, your ability still did its job, the expected effect happened. Either way, the outcome isn't going to radically impact your next decision. When it comes to a CC being resisted, the expected effect of your ability never happened, thus the outcome has a potentially radical (negative) impact on your next decision. You need a new plan.

Ludullu wrote: »

I think the middle ground compromise that I'd be fine with is if they add an exclusivity branch to the dodge mechanic, where your maneuverability goes waaaaaaay down, but your CC resistance goes up. In other words, make it a conscious choice on the side of the player, whether they want to have more protection against phys effects or magic ones.

A tree for different ways to spec dodge is definitely something interesting. My brain hurts too much to dive into it though.

Ludullu wrote: »

BUT I STILL WANT HEIGHTENED RESISTANCES RATHER THAN FULL EVASION AGAINST MAAAAGIC. You can't evade magic, cause it's fucking maaaagic.

Lol, like I said before, not gonna debate you on that. Cause I definitely agree.

Azherae

Blaspherian wrote: »

I can't wrap my head around how devs/gamers can think this adds to competitive integrity or fun gameplay.

https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/50899/crowd-control-should-not-be-based-on-rng

There was also some interesting stuff in:
https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/50615/try-to-limit-the-amount-of-braindead-and-anti-fun-cc-that-is-stuns-there-are-better-alternatives

(I'm not really asking nor suggesting you actually read through any of these, this post has a slightly different true purpose so...)

Veeshan

If you dont like CC resistance then get the counter stat to that which i think Physical or magical disable accuracy.

You know there a defence stat to every offencive stat and vice versa

player need to trade off stats elsewhere to get Disable resistance and you can counter it by trading off stats elsewhere to get Disable accuracy.

Blaspherian

Azherae wrote: »

Blaspherian wrote: »

I can't wrap my head around how devs/gamers can think this adds to competitive integrity or fun gameplay.

https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/50899/crowd-control-should-not-be-based-on-rng

There was also some interesting stuff in:
https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/50615/try-to-limit-the-amount-of-braindead-and-anti-fun-cc-that-is-stuns-there-are-better-alternatives

(I'm not really asking nor suggesting you actually read through any of these, this post has a slightly different true purpose so...)

Thanks for the links.

Blaspherian

Veeshan wrote: »

If you dont like CC resistance then get the counter stat to that which i think Physical or magical disable accuracy.

You know there a defence stat to every offencive stat and vice versa

player need to trade off stats elsewhere to get Disable resistance and you can counter it by trading off stats elsewhere to get Disable accuracy.

I'm aware of these stats. This thread is arguing that they, along with Disable Evasion should not exist. Thanks