Tab targeting can work just fine as a soft target prioritising feature during combat (think ESO, it was okay in that); for instances where healers are playing it can make the game much more engaging.
I'd personally be fine with full action + placeable AoE templates. However what we want kinda doesn't matter as Intrepid and @Steven Sharif has already made his decision according to the players' demands long ago + some market research I assume. What we have is a hybrid system which supposedly will take the best bits of both vastly different systems. I must say tho, the fact that 'if hybrid doesn't work we'll go tab' bit has been mentioned more than once in the last 5 months is kinda disturbing for most people that prefer action combat (so basically displeasing both tab audience - through APOC and with such statements the action audience). Once we see it working, most of the concerns will most likely be gone. I'd say just let the player choose either of them (both if you believe you can achieve it) which is what they are planning to do hopefully - meaning choosing either of those won't effect their gameplay significantly (that hybrid bit being forced on the player etc) and people will be able to enjoy it as they wish. In the last livestream I loved how Brad Constantine was passionate about making hybrid system work instead of trying to please\calm the audience by saying tab is their go to if things don't work out well etc. It's a bit of a long read but anyways. This is my opinion on the matter
2
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
The way it has been described is that it’s not like you’ll be able to go into one mode or the other, or decide if individual skills are action or tabbed. Each class will have a mix of skills, some action, some tab.
So if you want to go exclusively with one style or the other, it may be feasible, but you’d lose maybe half of the skills for your class. If you’re willing to be flexible you’ll have more variety.
Most games run just fine on systems below the stated minimum spec - and this was even more common in the '90's - let alone the recommended minimum.
EQ ran fine on dial-up. I specifically said this in the initial post that lead to this conversation.
That said, Verant (SoE) had a habit of designing games with an eye to future technology. EQ was designed in the knowledge that before long most people playing would have broadband internet, and EQ2 was designed with the assumption that within a few years of launch, most gamers would be running CPU's at 6ghz or higher (which is why the game had issues for a few years).
First, broadband usage was lower outside of the US.
Nope.
The US has never had the best internet service, and is often below average when looking at the whole of the OECD.
This is in part due to the physical size (Australia has this same issue), but also a general lack of competition (I have a choice of 37 different broadband providers where I live, how many do you have?).
Didn't you argue earlier that they had the make the game accessible to scientists in Antarctica, and miners in the outback Australia, because 350 ping to make the game extremely playable wasn't enough for you?
lol
0
NagashMember, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Didn't you argue earlier that they had the make the game accessible to scientists in Antarctica, and miners in the outback Australia, because 350 ping to make the game extremely playable wasn't enough for you?
lol
now now everyone knows people living in Australia don't need luxuries like water or internet
The dead do not squabble as this land’s rulers do. The dead have no desires, petty jealousies or ambitions. A world of the dead is a world at peace
Didn't you argue earlier that they had the make the game accessible to scientists in Antarctica, and miners in the outback Australia, because 350 ping to make the game extremely playable wasn't enough for you?
lol
now now everyone knows people living in Australia don't need luxuries like water or internet
I've got 220 ping to Australia from the East Coast, US.
As long as someone is not using satellite or on a connection that is borderline broken, they should be below 350 ping.
ESPECIALLY if there are localized servers.
Unfortunately that means that scientists in antarctica probably couldn't play the action combat well.
1
NagashMember, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Didn't you argue earlier that they had the make the game accessible to scientists in Antarctica, and miners in the outback Australia, because 350 ping to make the game extremely playable wasn't enough for you?
lol
now now everyone knows people living in Australia don't need luxuries like water or internet
I've got 220 ping to Australia from the East Coast, US.
As long as someone is not using satellite or on a connection that is borderline broken, they should be below 350 ping.
ESPECIALLY if there are localized servers.
Unfortunately that means that scientists in antarctica probably couldn't play the action combat well.
you mean the penguins
The dead do not squabble as this land’s rulers do. The dead have no desires, petty jealousies or ambitions. A world of the dead is a world at peace
Didn't you argue earlier that they had the make the game accessible to scientists in Antarctica, and miners in the outback Australia, because 350 ping to make the game extremely playable wasn't enough for you?
lol
I'm not sure what you're getting at here.
You seem to be getting mixed up between my statement that any game being released now should be playable in those areas, and the discussion on the original EQ.
Back in 1999, EQ was technically playable from Antarctica (the year Amundsen-Scott base received a dedicated {old} communications satellite). I don't know if anyone did (my first encounter with a gamer on Antarctica was in EQ2), but it was technically and technologically possible.
In order for a game to still be playable in those areas now, it needs to be able to factor in a 350 - 550 ping, something no game with pure action based combat has ever managed.
Australia's internal internet infrastructure is essentially broken.
Sure, you may get 220 ping to a server in Sydney from the east coast of the US, but that server is physically located at the end of the Endeavour Cable (linking Sydney to Hawaii). This means the data you send and receive essentially travel exclusively along what can be considered backbone internet infrastructure.
However, once you hit Australia, since a fiber optic network (National Broadband Network) was used as a political football for a decade or so, the speed quickly decreases. You probably have a faster connection to that server, located close to Paddington no doubt, than someone in Penrith would have to that same server - simply because that person in Penrith has to have their data sent and received over the Australian network.
However, as you get even further out of the major cities in Australia, your internet options are even worse. Once you hit the outback, the only option you have is satellite.
Didn't you argue earlier that they had the make the game accessible to scientists in Antarctica, and miners in the outback Australia, because 350 ping to make the game extremely playable wasn't enough for you?
lol
I'm not sure what you're getting at here.
You seem to be getting mixed up between my statement that any game being released now should be playable in those areas, and the discussion on the original EQ.
Back in 1999, EQ was technically playable from Antarctica (the year Amundsen-Scott base received a dedicated {old} communications satellite). I don't know if anyone did (my first encounter with a gamer on Antarctica was in EQ2), but it was technically and technologically possible.
In order for a game to still be playable in those areas now, it needs to be able to factor in a 350 - 550 ping, something no game with pure action based combat has ever managed.
They won’t be able to play tab effectively either with that kind of ping
Didn't you argue earlier that they had the make the game accessible to scientists in Antarctica, and miners in the outback Australia, because 350 ping to make the game extremely playable wasn't enough for you?
lol
I'm not sure what you're getting at here.
You seem to be getting mixed up between my statement that any game being released now should be playable in those areas, and the discussion on the original EQ.
Back in 1999, EQ was technically playable from Antarctica (the year Amundsen-Scott base received a dedicated {old} communications satellite). I don't know if anyone did (my first encounter with a gamer on Antarctica was in EQ2), but it was technically and technologically possible.
In order for a game to still be playable in those areas now, it needs to be able to factor in a 350 - 550 ping, something no game with pure action based combat has ever managed.
They won’t be able to play tab effectively either with that kind of ping
Yeah they will.
It is possible to play a tab targeting based game that has a 0.5 second GCD with a ping of up to 750 and still be able to function well enough. Not 100%, to be sure, but well enough.
There are limitations - you want to spec with long casting, big hitting abilities, and builds that have instant cast anything are out of the question.
PvP is also fairly hard, but still possible. Along with the slower casting big hitting abilities, you need to make sure you don't have positional based attacks, and you should do everything you can to block CC rather than remove it once it is on you.
When work has required me to travel, I've been involved in top end raiding in both EQ2 and Rift (and top end PvP in Archeage) with a ping as high as 750.
To be fair, if 750 is the best connection you can get, I would consider it unplayable in any game, but if you know how to play the game already, and then figure out how to best mitigate that latency when on the road, it is possible.
550 though, that is playable in any tab targeting game.
I find things like this to be similar monitor resolution/refresh. I game on a 40 inch, 4k 120hz monitor. I often think 1080p is unplayable for some games - but then when I have to travel I'm on to my laptop with a 1080p, 15 inch 60hz monitor and I make do just fine - even if it isn't the same experience.
To people that are used to a ping in the double digits, anything as high as 350 seems unplayable. But when you are in a situation where that is what you have, you find ways to make it work.
I just want the game to have fun combat, and from what we've seen, they have done substantially better with action combat than tab target.
That may well have something to do with them having spent far more time on action combat so far than tab targeting.
At least in what they have shown us - because we have yet to see any real tab target based combat. Alpha 0 was purely tab target based, but was so limited to just a few basic skills and was functionally more a proof of concept that the games servers actually worked rather than proof of design that it really doesn't matter what the combat there was.
Edit; and satellite internet works just fine for any online game other than action combat based ones.
I love all 3 base types of combat systems and my favorite MMOs of all time are:
Tab-Target would be "Last Chaos"
Turn-based would be "ToonTown" (I played for quite a few years since release and on fan-made servers when main servers closed)
Action-Combat would be Tera (Has a better combat system than a lot of single player games but boring Lore)
In my experience and opinion, WoW has the best tab -targeting and TERA has the best action combat system. Mix those two succesfully and AoC has the best combat system ever seen.
Do you need a ride to the Underworld?
0
NagashMember, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I still miss the PvP from age of reckoning
The dead do not squabble as this land’s rulers do. The dead have no desires, petty jealousies or ambitions. A world of the dead is a world at peace
0
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I liked a lot of the combat in Wildstar. There was a lot I didn’t like but the combat was good. I really liked the grids that would go on the ground before attacks so that you knew where to direct your attacks. It was twitchy without being all-out FPS style.
(Not that I hate FPS, I’ve been playing Borderlands 3 like crazy lately.)
Honestly, this thread is a great example of why I'm more excited for Ashes than for any other MMO right now.
I hate FPS games, I'm not a big fan of twitch based combat, yet Ashes is a game where I should be able to build a character that works for me, and play along side someone that hates tab targeting and methodical, purposeful builds in favor of twitch based action combat.
If Intrepid pull off their combat system, this game will have a bigger potential interested audience than any other MMO.
Hey man, I love methodical, purposeful builds.
I just think that it's frankly more fun to do it in an action setting.
In an action setting, your aim is more important than your build.
I've yet to see an action game where the build of your character is nearly as important as your build in a tab target (or turn based RPG for that matter).
I mean, some games have builds that are better or worse than other builds, but in all cases the build takes a back seat to other factors.
Hey man, I love methodical, purposeful builds.
I just think that it's frankly more fun to do it in an action setting.
In an action setting, your aim is more important than your build.
I've yet to see an action game where the build of your character is nearly as important as your build in a tab target (or turn based RPG for that matter).
I mean, some games have builds that are better or worse than other builds, but in all cases the build takes a back seat to other factors.
Hey man, I love methodical, purposeful builds.
I just think that it's frankly more fun to do it in an action setting.
In an action setting, your aim is more important than your build.
I've yet to see an action game where the build of your character is nearly as important as your build in a tab target (or turn based RPG for that matter).
I mean, some games have builds that are better or worse than other builds, but in all cases the build takes a back seat to other factors.
You never played Darkfall: Unholy Wars
Correct.
I tend to stay away from online games if it is obvious to me that they are going to have a short life.
That said, my understanding of that game is that you can still miss a target. If you can miss because you didn't aim, then the build is not the most important factor.
I want to point out again though, I'm not against action combat. I prefer and will use tab target based builds as long as they are viable for the characters I want to play, but I appreciate the fact that people that will use action based builds are able to play the same game.
As long as both are equal with each other (which means players need to have a way to excel in both, and way to fail at both, but generally be balanced with each other), then all is well imo.
I'd say it's just on par with action combat. A lot of people here are decade old mmorpg veterans and if you just completely take away tab targeting that would be just a huge outrage from them.
On the other hand since lots of them have families and jobs they won't be grinding 24/7 like the younger audience could. There's literally no game that has a large playerbase that's young and growing that is only tab targeting. It is old and objectively slow paced and allows for less skill to be shown in games. Hence why no esports are tab targeted or anything like that.
There's a good balance to be had, people have their preferences and opinions and they're allowed to have those. Personally I like action combat more because it feels more involved, impactful and more skillful.
You still have to manage rotations and everything but you also add another element of aiming and timing and stuff like that into the mix. It allows for better players to shine even more.
Tab targeting's plus side for me would be, say I have one or two tab targeted abilities that I know will always 100% hit because I don't have to aim them. That's good consistent damage and would allow someone to farm something very easily because you wouldn't even have to be looking to be doing damage.
I think for what AoC is trying to be, revitalizing the MMORPG genre it NEEDS action combat. Younger players just in majority aren't interested in tab targeted only combat. That's clear through every popular game or esport or other gaming genre. You can't always appeal to the veteran mmorpg fans because most of them will be busy a lot of the time anyway. The game should of course have tab and action combat, and by no means am I saying add building and chug jugs and appeal to 12 year olds but.. appealing to a younger audience is still key to growing the genre at all, otherwise you never will.
Comments
So if you want to go exclusively with one style or the other, it may be feasible, but you’d lose maybe half of the skills for your class. If you’re willing to be flexible you’ll have more variety.
Most games run just fine on systems below the stated minimum spec - and this was even more common in the '90's - let alone the recommended minimum.
EQ ran fine on dial-up. I specifically said this in the initial post that lead to this conversation.
That said, Verant (SoE) had a habit of designing games with an eye to future technology. EQ was designed in the knowledge that before long most people playing would have broadband internet, and EQ2 was designed with the assumption that within a few years of launch, most gamers would be running CPU's at 6ghz or higher (which is why the game had issues for a few years).
Nope.
The US has never had the best internet service, and is often below average when looking at the whole of the OECD.
This is in part due to the physical size (Australia has this same issue), but also a general lack of competition (I have a choice of 37 different broadband providers where I live, how many do you have?).
lol
now now everyone knows people living in Australia don't need luxuries like water or internet
I've got 220 ping to Australia from the East Coast, US.
As long as someone is not using satellite or on a connection that is borderline broken, they should be below 350 ping.
ESPECIALLY if there are localized servers.
Unfortunately that means that scientists in antarctica probably couldn't play the action combat well.
you mean the penguins
I'm not sure what you're getting at here.
You seem to be getting mixed up between my statement that any game being released now should be playable in those areas, and the discussion on the original EQ.
Back in 1999, EQ was technically playable from Antarctica (the year Amundsen-Scott base received a dedicated {old} communications satellite). I don't know if anyone did (my first encounter with a gamer on Antarctica was in EQ2), but it was technically and technologically possible.
In order for a game to still be playable in those areas now, it needs to be able to factor in a 350 - 550 ping, something no game with pure action based combat has ever managed.
Sure, you may get 220 ping to a server in Sydney from the east coast of the US, but that server is physically located at the end of the Endeavour Cable (linking Sydney to Hawaii). This means the data you send and receive essentially travel exclusively along what can be considered backbone internet infrastructure.
However, once you hit Australia, since a fiber optic network (National Broadband Network) was used as a political football for a decade or so, the speed quickly decreases. You probably have a faster connection to that server, located close to Paddington no doubt, than someone in Penrith would have to that same server - simply because that person in Penrith has to have their data sent and received over the Australian network.
However, as you get even further out of the major cities in Australia, your internet options are even worse. Once you hit the outback, the only option you have is satellite.
They won’t be able to play tab effectively either with that kind of ping
Yeah they will.
It is possible to play a tab targeting based game that has a 0.5 second GCD with a ping of up to 750 and still be able to function well enough. Not 100%, to be sure, but well enough.
There are limitations - you want to spec with long casting, big hitting abilities, and builds that have instant cast anything are out of the question.
PvP is also fairly hard, but still possible. Along with the slower casting big hitting abilities, you need to make sure you don't have positional based attacks, and you should do everything you can to block CC rather than remove it once it is on you.
When work has required me to travel, I've been involved in top end raiding in both EQ2 and Rift (and top end PvP in Archeage) with a ping as high as 750.
To be fair, if 750 is the best connection you can get, I would consider it unplayable in any game, but if you know how to play the game already, and then figure out how to best mitigate that latency when on the road, it is possible.
550 though, that is playable in any tab targeting game.
I find things like this to be similar monitor resolution/refresh. I game on a 40 inch, 4k 120hz monitor. I often think 1080p is unplayable for some games - but then when I have to travel I'm on to my laptop with a 1080p, 15 inch 60hz monitor and I make do just fine - even if it isn't the same experience.
To people that are used to a ping in the double digits, anything as high as 350 seems unplayable. But when you are in a situation where that is what you have, you find ways to make it work.
Even if the game is 75%, 25%, hybrid you're going to be at a big disadvantage.
I just want the game to have fun combat, and from what we've seen, they have done substantially better with action combat than tab target.
I think that's tje only test ground they had for tab target. Could be wrong.
At least in what they have shown us - because we have yet to see any real tab target based combat. Alpha 0 was purely tab target based, but was so limited to just a few basic skills and was functionally more a proof of concept that the games servers actually worked rather than proof of design that it really doesn't matter what the combat there was.
Edit; and satellite internet works just fine for any online game other than action combat based ones.
I love all 3 base types of combat systems and my favorite MMOs of all time are:
Tab-Target would be "Last Chaos"
Turn-based would be "ToonTown" (I played for quite a few years since release and on fan-made servers when main servers closed)
Action-Combat would be Tera (Has a better combat system than a lot of single player games but boring Lore)
(Not that I hate FPS, I’ve been playing Borderlands 3 like crazy lately.)
I hate FPS games, I'm not a big fan of twitch based combat, yet Ashes is a game where I should be able to build a character that works for me, and play along side someone that hates tab targeting and methodical, purposeful builds in favor of twitch based action combat.
If Intrepid pull off their combat system, this game will have a bigger potential interested audience than any other MMO.
I just think that it's frankly more fun to do it in an action setting.
In an action setting, your aim is more important than your build.
I've yet to see an action game where the build of your character is nearly as important as your build in a tab target (or turn based RPG for that matter).
I mean, some games have builds that are better or worse than other builds, but in all cases the build takes a back seat to other factors.
You never played Darkfall: Unholy Wars
I tend to stay away from online games if it is obvious to me that they are going to have a short life.
That said, my understanding of that game is that you can still miss a target. If you can miss because you didn't aim, then the build is not the most important factor.
I want to point out again though, I'm not against action combat. I prefer and will use tab target based builds as long as they are viable for the characters I want to play, but I appreciate the fact that people that will use action based builds are able to play the same game.
As long as both are equal with each other (which means players need to have a way to excel in both, and way to fail at both, but generally be balanced with each other), then all is well imo.
On the other hand since lots of them have families and jobs they won't be grinding 24/7 like the younger audience could. There's literally no game that has a large playerbase that's young and growing that is only tab targeting. It is old and objectively slow paced and allows for less skill to be shown in games. Hence why no esports are tab targeted or anything like that.
There's a good balance to be had, people have their preferences and opinions and they're allowed to have those. Personally I like action combat more because it feels more involved, impactful and more skillful.
You still have to manage rotations and everything but you also add another element of aiming and timing and stuff like that into the mix. It allows for better players to shine even more.
Tab targeting's plus side for me would be, say I have one or two tab targeted abilities that I know will always 100% hit because I don't have to aim them. That's good consistent damage and would allow someone to farm something very easily because you wouldn't even have to be looking to be doing damage.
I think for what AoC is trying to be, revitalizing the MMORPG genre it NEEDS action combat. Younger players just in majority aren't interested in tab targeted only combat. That's clear through every popular game or esport or other gaming genre. You can't always appeal to the veteran mmorpg fans because most of them will be busy a lot of the time anyway. The game should of course have tab and action combat, and by no means am I saying add building and chug jugs and appeal to 12 year olds but.. appealing to a younger audience is still key to growing the genre at all, otherwise you never will.