noaani wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » noaani wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » by simple virtue of being required to press more keys to achieve the same result as another player who doesn't have to hard lock onto their target first. Number of key presses is probably the stupids metric for deciding what is a better or worse game system I've ever seen. By that logic, Die Hard (with Bruce Willis) is the best game out there, as it requires no key presses at all. Soft targeting sucks for when there are multiple targets in the same area. Tab targeting is far superior in these situations, but ONLY if the player sets it up. Players that complain about tab targeting are players that have not set it up. If there are not multiple targets in the area, the targeting system used makes no meaningful difference. Based on that, tab targeting is better. Setting up tab targeting requires an unruly amount of keybinds. Target closest enemy, target target of my target, target farthest enemy, target closest ally, target farthest ally, target lowest health ally, target enemy targeting me, cycle closest -> farthest, cycle farthest -> closest, etc etc, there could be literally dozens, while a soft lock system lets you use your own eyes and brain to follow target selection and prioritize on your own. A player that knows what they are doing will have all of their targeting options set up with variations of tab and tilde keys (and Esc in some games that allow for it), along with alt, ctrl and shift modifiers, and they will have different profiles set up for different roles they are playing in the group or raid.
Caeryl wrote: » noaani wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » by simple virtue of being required to press more keys to achieve the same result as another player who doesn't have to hard lock onto their target first. Number of key presses is probably the stupids metric for deciding what is a better or worse game system I've ever seen. By that logic, Die Hard (with Bruce Willis) is the best game out there, as it requires no key presses at all. Soft targeting sucks for when there are multiple targets in the same area. Tab targeting is far superior in these situations, but ONLY if the player sets it up. Players that complain about tab targeting are players that have not set it up. If there are not multiple targets in the area, the targeting system used makes no meaningful difference. Based on that, tab targeting is better. Setting up tab targeting requires an unruly amount of keybinds. Target closest enemy, target target of my target, target farthest enemy, target closest ally, target farthest ally, target lowest health ally, target enemy targeting me, cycle closest -> farthest, cycle farthest -> closest, etc etc, there could be literally dozens, while a soft lock system lets you use your own eyes and brain to follow target selection and prioritize on your own.
noaani wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » by simple virtue of being required to press more keys to achieve the same result as another player who doesn't have to hard lock onto their target first. Number of key presses is probably the stupids metric for deciding what is a better or worse game system I've ever seen. By that logic, Die Hard (with Bruce Willis) is the best game out there, as it requires no key presses at all. Soft targeting sucks for when there are multiple targets in the same area. Tab targeting is far superior in these situations, but ONLY if the player sets it up. Players that complain about tab targeting are players that have not set it up. If there are not multiple targets in the area, the targeting system used makes no meaningful difference. Based on that, tab targeting is better.
Caeryl wrote: » by simple virtue of being required to press more keys to achieve the same result as another player who doesn't have to hard lock onto their target first.
noaani wrote: » These two statements together form an oxymoron. Tab targeting systems almost always have more depth than most players realize - and I am only talking about the targeting aspect. If you set this up in a way that makes sense to you as a player and that fits the role of your character, it is FAR more useful than manually targeting could ever be. On the other hand, if you do nothing at all to set it up and leave it to where tab targets the nearest enemy and then continual presses target the next further away enemy, what you end up with if mobs are on the move is an unintuitive and unresponsive mess of a target system - but that is the fault of the player, not the game. Soft targeting sucks for when there are multiple targets in the same area. Tab targeting is far superior in these situations, but ONLY if the player sets it up. Players that complain about tab targeting are players that have not set it up. If there are not multiple targets in the area, the targeting system used makes no meaningful difference. Based on that, tab targeting is better.
Caeryl wrote: » You're the one who latched onto a thrown out number
Caeryl wrote: » Please make sure you actually read and understand what you’re replying to .05s =/= .5s
Caeryl wrote: » You read .05s as half a second and you’re really trying to act like I’m the one being ridiculous?
Caeryl wrote: » noaani wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » noaani wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » by simple virtue of being required to press more keys to achieve the same result as another player who doesn't have to hard lock onto their target first. Number of key presses is probably the stupids metric for deciding what is a better or worse game system I've ever seen. By that logic, Die Hard (with Bruce Willis) is the best game out there, as it requires no key presses at all. Soft targeting sucks for when there are multiple targets in the same area. Tab targeting is far superior in these situations, but ONLY if the player sets it up. Players that complain about tab targeting are players that have not set it up. If there are not multiple targets in the area, the targeting system used makes no meaningful difference. Based on that, tab targeting is better. Setting up tab targeting requires an unruly amount of keybinds. Target closest enemy, target target of my target, target farthest enemy, target closest ally, target farthest ally, target lowest health ally, target enemy targeting me, cycle closest -> farthest, cycle farthest -> closest, etc etc, there could be literally dozens, while a soft lock system lets you use your own eyes and brain to follow target selection and prioritize on your own. A player that knows what they are doing will have all of their targeting options set up with variations of tab and tilde keys (and Esc in some games that allow for it), along with alt, ctrl and shift modifiers, and they will have different profiles set up for different roles they are playing in the group or raid. I can't imagine having the confidence to claim it doesn't take an excess of keybinds to have all your targeting options set up, and then immediately say it takes multiple sets of 2+ key combos to set up all your targeting options
Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » You're the one who latched onto a thrown out number Really? I’m the one who latched onto it? Caeryl wrote: » Please make sure you actually read and understand what you’re replying to .05s =/= .5s Caeryl wrote: » You read .05s as half a second and you’re really trying to act like I’m the one being ridiculous? It seems like it was important enough for you to repeatedly go back to it. In fact you based the strength of your argument on it, since my misreading of one decimal point was your only retort twice. Now that you admit you made it all up you’re trying to backpedal furiously. You’re even trying to pretend that I was the one who initially focused on it even though clearly you did. You can’t even keep track of what you’re saying in this thread, let alone put together a cohesive argument. “I like it more” is not an objective statement, no matter how hard you pretend otherwise. Give it up.
Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Tab will always take more time to complete an identical action than a soft-target system, because you will always have at least one more button to press in the targeting process. That small bit of time can be the difference between a groupmate living or dying. Factually incorrect. If someone is behind me I can press tab then my attack key faster than you can turn around, target, then press a key/click a button. Stop pretending like there’s some absolute advantage to one system over another. You spend .05s to reach for tab, I take .05s to turn my camera and we both press an ability. Tab is fine if aren’t capable of quick reflexes for some reason, but anyone with quick reflexes will just be hindered by the delays of having to tab to use an ability. If it takes you a half second to reach for and tap a key then I’m not the one with poor reflexes.
Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Tab will always take more time to complete an identical action than a soft-target system, because you will always have at least one more button to press in the targeting process. That small bit of time can be the difference between a groupmate living or dying. Factually incorrect. If someone is behind me I can press tab then my attack key faster than you can turn around, target, then press a key/click a button. Stop pretending like there’s some absolute advantage to one system over another. You spend .05s to reach for tab, I take .05s to turn my camera and we both press an ability. Tab is fine if aren’t capable of quick reflexes for some reason, but anyone with quick reflexes will just be hindered by the delays of having to tab to use an ability.
Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Tab will always take more time to complete an identical action than a soft-target system, because you will always have at least one more button to press in the targeting process. That small bit of time can be the difference between a groupmate living or dying. Factually incorrect. If someone is behind me I can press tab then my attack key faster than you can turn around, target, then press a key/click a button. Stop pretending like there’s some absolute advantage to one system over another.
Caeryl wrote: » Tab will always take more time to complete an identical action than a soft-target system, because you will always have at least one more button to press in the targeting process. That small bit of time can be the difference between a groupmate living or dying.
Private wrote: » Right, so again, the player needs to set up their targeting options because the game is incapable of providing a system that fits all classes and play styles.
noaani wrote: » The argument here isn't so much about "this is how it's always been, why change it", so much as there are a number of people arguing for change whom have quite clearly never actually played a tab target game in the manner it was intended to be played.
mcstackerson wrote: » noaani wrote: » The argument here isn't so much about "this is how it's always been, why change it", so much as there are a number of people arguing for change whom have quite clearly never actually played a tab target game in the manner it was intended to be played. I'm the opposite, I grew up on tab target mmos and don't like the number of binds you have to set up for targets, especially at the high level where you are making macros that both target and use abilities. I much prefer to just look at my target then set up a bunch of hot keys to switch around.
Caeryl wrote: » wolfwood82 wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Tab will always take more time to complete an identical action than a soft-target system, because you will always have at least one more button to press in the targeting process. That small bit of time can be the difference between a groupmate living or dying. Factually incorrect. If someone is behind me I can press tab then my attack key faster than you can turn around, target, then press a key/click a button. Stop pretending like there’s some absolute advantage to one system over another. You spend .05s to reach for tab, I take .05s to turn my camera and we both press an ability. Tab is fine if aren’t capable of quick reflexes for some reason, but anyone with quick reflexes will just be hindered by the delays of having to tab to use an ability. If it takes you a half second to reach for and tap a key then I’m not the one with poor reflexes. Please make sure you actually read and understand what you’re replying to .05s =/= .5s Then you’re absolutely full of crap. You read .05s as half a second and you’re really trying to act like I’m the one being ridiculous? Yes. I missed where the decimal point was. Oh wow. You on the other hand have the delusion that in 1/20th of a second you can spin around, target an enemy, and activate an attack. You either have absolutely no idea how fast that is or you’re trolling, either way you pulled it out of your ass. For the sake of context, a really good frame rate for an MMO is 80 fps. That is extremely good. You’re saying that you can spin around and attack in the time it takes for a game to render 4 frames of animation. Or get a stopwatch and time .05 seconds. Which is extremely difficult to do. Hell, on my phone I can’t even tap fast enough on one finger to start and stop a stopwatch in that time. The best I can get is .1 second. And you claim you have superhuman speed and can spin around and attack an enemy almost as fast as a computer can render it. Again, you are completely full of it. I thought you were talking about a half a second because that’s physically possible. Now it is clear you have no idea what you’re saying, and any shred of credibility you want to claim is gone. Try not to make up completely insane and impossible claims next time you want to present an argument. You have a poor grasp of how combat functions if you think the enemy is somehow invisible before I decide to attack it. I’m not reacting to a spontaneously appearing mob, I turn to pop off a quick hit to the enemy behind me when I see it charging an attack, then turn back to my primary target in one fluid motion. That’s a straightforward and easy thing to do, and altogether it might take a quarter of a second after noticing it to turn, attack, and turn back. Go throw your temper tantrum elsewhere. If you wanted a discussion, then you wouldn’t be complete ignoring the fact that I gave comparable speed to a tab click. And whether you acknowledge it or not, it’ll take more time to tab target for the same process I just described than it takes for action combat. For every target swap, tab will always have an extra button to press. He didn't mention invisible enemy anywhere in the quoted post. I read it, twice. You're also fabricating unmentioned details in the scenario you're claiming you can accomplish. Assuming an opponent behind you is one you've had time to recognize and plan a proper response using tactics rather than a snap reaction (which is what Atama was initially setting up as a scenario). On top of that, you are still claiming super human reaction speeds. It takes "the average human" (in this particular case, pretty much all healthy humans. Reaction times are very... consistent) .25 seconds to react to visual stimulus. In the time it takes a normal human to perceive a threat, you are able to perceive, register, plan a response, and execute that response? You may be able to pull that off if you react to an audio stimulus, which drops almost a full .1s off your reaction time, but that's assuming you can achieve precision aiming based on audio alone. Furthermore, your response requires coordination between left and right hand. That means communication between left and right hemispheres of your brain. Tab+Action can be performed with just the left hand, meaning zero communication and zero chance to miss or foul key press sequence. How does this work out? When you use two hands to type on the keyboard, you'll often have typos. That's because the two halves of your brain must constantly communicate with each other to coordinate your key press sequence. You'll notice that the typos almost always involve key press sequence issues when pushing a key with one hand, then the next key with the other in rapid succession. That means YOUR response requires the initial reaction, followed by moving the mouse, timing the action perfectly in motion, and resuming the spin to re-engage another target. Sounds all smooth criminal like, but that's a really REALLY tough claim to prove there chief. You might think "Well I have buttons on my mouse set for action buttons! So I'm only using one hand and thus one hemisphere!" Nope. You'd have to have the left half of your brain specializing in both spatial awareness AND calculation, which is incredibly rare. If you were one of those rare cases, you would not be wasting your life arguing on a forum, you'd be making YouTube videos of sinking baskets from the bleachers like a boss. Meaning you're two hemispheres are still having to communicate just because you are adding the aim to your action sequence, while tab target completely eliminates that step all together. Atama is absolutely correct, in the scenario he presented, tab target is much quicker than spin+aim+action. Your argument about brain communication is so funny, because all it does is prove you wrong.
wolfwood82 wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Tab will always take more time to complete an identical action than a soft-target system, because you will always have at least one more button to press in the targeting process. That small bit of time can be the difference between a groupmate living or dying. Factually incorrect. If someone is behind me I can press tab then my attack key faster than you can turn around, target, then press a key/click a button. Stop pretending like there’s some absolute advantage to one system over another. You spend .05s to reach for tab, I take .05s to turn my camera and we both press an ability. Tab is fine if aren’t capable of quick reflexes for some reason, but anyone with quick reflexes will just be hindered by the delays of having to tab to use an ability. If it takes you a half second to reach for and tap a key then I’m not the one with poor reflexes. Please make sure you actually read and understand what you’re replying to .05s =/= .5s Then you’re absolutely full of crap. You read .05s as half a second and you’re really trying to act like I’m the one being ridiculous? Yes. I missed where the decimal point was. Oh wow. You on the other hand have the delusion that in 1/20th of a second you can spin around, target an enemy, and activate an attack. You either have absolutely no idea how fast that is or you’re trolling, either way you pulled it out of your ass. For the sake of context, a really good frame rate for an MMO is 80 fps. That is extremely good. You’re saying that you can spin around and attack in the time it takes for a game to render 4 frames of animation. Or get a stopwatch and time .05 seconds. Which is extremely difficult to do. Hell, on my phone I can’t even tap fast enough on one finger to start and stop a stopwatch in that time. The best I can get is .1 second. And you claim you have superhuman speed and can spin around and attack an enemy almost as fast as a computer can render it. Again, you are completely full of it. I thought you were talking about a half a second because that’s physically possible. Now it is clear you have no idea what you’re saying, and any shred of credibility you want to claim is gone. Try not to make up completely insane and impossible claims next time you want to present an argument. You have a poor grasp of how combat functions if you think the enemy is somehow invisible before I decide to attack it. I’m not reacting to a spontaneously appearing mob, I turn to pop off a quick hit to the enemy behind me when I see it charging an attack, then turn back to my primary target in one fluid motion. That’s a straightforward and easy thing to do, and altogether it might take a quarter of a second after noticing it to turn, attack, and turn back. Go throw your temper tantrum elsewhere. If you wanted a discussion, then you wouldn’t be complete ignoring the fact that I gave comparable speed to a tab click. And whether you acknowledge it or not, it’ll take more time to tab target for the same process I just described than it takes for action combat. For every target swap, tab will always have an extra button to press. He didn't mention invisible enemy anywhere in the quoted post. I read it, twice. You're also fabricating unmentioned details in the scenario you're claiming you can accomplish. Assuming an opponent behind you is one you've had time to recognize and plan a proper response using tactics rather than a snap reaction (which is what Atama was initially setting up as a scenario). On top of that, you are still claiming super human reaction speeds. It takes "the average human" (in this particular case, pretty much all healthy humans. Reaction times are very... consistent) .25 seconds to react to visual stimulus. In the time it takes a normal human to perceive a threat, you are able to perceive, register, plan a response, and execute that response? You may be able to pull that off if you react to an audio stimulus, which drops almost a full .1s off your reaction time, but that's assuming you can achieve precision aiming based on audio alone. Furthermore, your response requires coordination between left and right hand. That means communication between left and right hemispheres of your brain. Tab+Action can be performed with just the left hand, meaning zero communication and zero chance to miss or foul key press sequence. How does this work out? When you use two hands to type on the keyboard, you'll often have typos. That's because the two halves of your brain must constantly communicate with each other to coordinate your key press sequence. You'll notice that the typos almost always involve key press sequence issues when pushing a key with one hand, then the next key with the other in rapid succession. That means YOUR response requires the initial reaction, followed by moving the mouse, timing the action perfectly in motion, and resuming the spin to re-engage another target. Sounds all smooth criminal like, but that's a really REALLY tough claim to prove there chief. You might think "Well I have buttons on my mouse set for action buttons! So I'm only using one hand and thus one hemisphere!" Nope. You'd have to have the left half of your brain specializing in both spatial awareness AND calculation, which is incredibly rare. If you were one of those rare cases, you would not be wasting your life arguing on a forum, you'd be making YouTube videos of sinking baskets from the bleachers like a boss. Meaning you're two hemispheres are still having to communicate just because you are adding the aim to your action sequence, while tab target completely eliminates that step all together. Atama is absolutely correct, in the scenario he presented, tab target is much quicker than spin+aim+action.
Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Tab will always take more time to complete an identical action than a soft-target system, because you will always have at least one more button to press in the targeting process. That small bit of time can be the difference between a groupmate living or dying. Factually incorrect. If someone is behind me I can press tab then my attack key faster than you can turn around, target, then press a key/click a button. Stop pretending like there’s some absolute advantage to one system over another. You spend .05s to reach for tab, I take .05s to turn my camera and we both press an ability. Tab is fine if aren’t capable of quick reflexes for some reason, but anyone with quick reflexes will just be hindered by the delays of having to tab to use an ability. If it takes you a half second to reach for and tap a key then I’m not the one with poor reflexes. Please make sure you actually read and understand what you’re replying to .05s =/= .5s Then you’re absolutely full of crap. You read .05s as half a second and you’re really trying to act like I’m the one being ridiculous? Yes. I missed where the decimal point was. Oh wow. You on the other hand have the delusion that in 1/20th of a second you can spin around, target an enemy, and activate an attack. You either have absolutely no idea how fast that is or you’re trolling, either way you pulled it out of your ass. For the sake of context, a really good frame rate for an MMO is 80 fps. That is extremely good. You’re saying that you can spin around and attack in the time it takes for a game to render 4 frames of animation. Or get a stopwatch and time .05 seconds. Which is extremely difficult to do. Hell, on my phone I can’t even tap fast enough on one finger to start and stop a stopwatch in that time. The best I can get is .1 second. And you claim you have superhuman speed and can spin around and attack an enemy almost as fast as a computer can render it. Again, you are completely full of it. I thought you were talking about a half a second because that’s physically possible. Now it is clear you have no idea what you’re saying, and any shred of credibility you want to claim is gone. Try not to make up completely insane and impossible claims next time you want to present an argument. You have a poor grasp of how combat functions if you think the enemy is somehow invisible before I decide to attack it. I’m not reacting to a spontaneously appearing mob, I turn to pop off a quick hit to the enemy behind me when I see it charging an attack, then turn back to my primary target in one fluid motion. That’s a straightforward and easy thing to do, and altogether it might take a quarter of a second after noticing it to turn, attack, and turn back. Go throw your temper tantrum elsewhere. If you wanted a discussion, then you wouldn’t be complete ignoring the fact that I gave comparable speed to a tab click. And whether you acknowledge it or not, it’ll take more time to tab target for the same process I just described than it takes for action combat. For every target swap, tab will always have an extra button to press.
Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Tab will always take more time to complete an identical action than a soft-target system, because you will always have at least one more button to press in the targeting process. That small bit of time can be the difference between a groupmate living or dying. Factually incorrect. If someone is behind me I can press tab then my attack key faster than you can turn around, target, then press a key/click a button. Stop pretending like there’s some absolute advantage to one system over another. You spend .05s to reach for tab, I take .05s to turn my camera and we both press an ability. Tab is fine if aren’t capable of quick reflexes for some reason, but anyone with quick reflexes will just be hindered by the delays of having to tab to use an ability. If it takes you a half second to reach for and tap a key then I’m not the one with poor reflexes. Please make sure you actually read and understand what you’re replying to .05s =/= .5s Then you’re absolutely full of crap. You read .05s as half a second and you’re really trying to act like I’m the one being ridiculous? Yes. I missed where the decimal point was. Oh wow. You on the other hand have the delusion that in 1/20th of a second you can spin around, target an enemy, and activate an attack. You either have absolutely no idea how fast that is or you’re trolling, either way you pulled it out of your ass. For the sake of context, a really good frame rate for an MMO is 80 fps. That is extremely good. You’re saying that you can spin around and attack in the time it takes for a game to render 4 frames of animation. Or get a stopwatch and time .05 seconds. Which is extremely difficult to do. Hell, on my phone I can’t even tap fast enough on one finger to start and stop a stopwatch in that time. The best I can get is .1 second. And you claim you have superhuman speed and can spin around and attack an enemy almost as fast as a computer can render it. Again, you are completely full of it. I thought you were talking about a half a second because that’s physically possible. Now it is clear you have no idea what you’re saying, and any shred of credibility you want to claim is gone. Try not to make up completely insane and impossible claims next time you want to present an argument.
Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Tab will always take more time to complete an identical action than a soft-target system, because you will always have at least one more button to press in the targeting process. That small bit of time can be the difference between a groupmate living or dying. Factually incorrect. If someone is behind me I can press tab then my attack key faster than you can turn around, target, then press a key/click a button. Stop pretending like there’s some absolute advantage to one system over another. You spend .05s to reach for tab, I take .05s to turn my camera and we both press an ability. Tab is fine if aren’t capable of quick reflexes for some reason, but anyone with quick reflexes will just be hindered by the delays of having to tab to use an ability. If it takes you a half second to reach for and tap a key then I’m not the one with poor reflexes. Please make sure you actually read and understand what you’re replying to .05s =/= .5s Then you’re absolutely full of crap. You read .05s as half a second and you’re really trying to act like I’m the one being ridiculous?
Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Tab will always take more time to complete an identical action than a soft-target system, because you will always have at least one more button to press in the targeting process. That small bit of time can be the difference between a groupmate living or dying. Factually incorrect. If someone is behind me I can press tab then my attack key faster than you can turn around, target, then press a key/click a button. Stop pretending like there’s some absolute advantage to one system over another. You spend .05s to reach for tab, I take .05s to turn my camera and we both press an ability. Tab is fine if aren’t capable of quick reflexes for some reason, but anyone with quick reflexes will just be hindered by the delays of having to tab to use an ability. If it takes you a half second to reach for and tap a key then I’m not the one with poor reflexes. Please make sure you actually read and understand what you’re replying to .05s =/= .5s Then you’re absolutely full of crap.
Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Atama wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Tab will always take more time to complete an identical action than a soft-target system, because you will always have at least one more button to press in the targeting process. That small bit of time can be the difference between a groupmate living or dying. Factually incorrect. If someone is behind me I can press tab then my attack key faster than you can turn around, target, then press a key/click a button. Stop pretending like there’s some absolute advantage to one system over another. You spend .05s to reach for tab, I take .05s to turn my camera and we both press an ability. Tab is fine if aren’t capable of quick reflexes for some reason, but anyone with quick reflexes will just be hindered by the delays of having to tab to use an ability. If it takes you a half second to reach for and tap a key then I’m not the one with poor reflexes. Please make sure you actually read and understand what you’re replying to .05s =/= .5s
Caeryl wrote: » I’ve never said anything remotely like “I like it more” and decided that’s an indicator of superiority. I did say action combat takes objectively less time, which is true because it doesn’t require button pressing to be allowed to use abilities. It also allows for at-will target changes, which it does because you’re not required to tab onto the next target when you can just look at it. It does not auto lock and make you incapable of missing, which is the biggest point in tab’s favor, but which shouldn’t really exist in a PvX game anyway but at least it won’t be including crowd control.
Undead Canuck wrote: » I will probably be called a troll again for just responding, but why don't we just wait until A1/A2 to figure out which is better? I am sure that they will be trying multiple scenerios and people will be able to adjust their gameplay to what they prefer. If someone doesn't like action (which I assume includes soft targeting), go 75% tab. If someone doesn't like tab, go 75% action. Then you only have to ignore 25% of your abilities to play exactly how you want.
Atama wrote: » There are many great reasons to prefer action combat like soft targeting. It feels more natural. It’s more engaging or exciting. It allows reflexes to be a factor. But your reasons are crap. They’re backwards. Your argument is the equivalent of claiming a bicycle is a better commute method than a car because it has a higher top speed.
noaani wrote: » Almost all action games out there (all that I know of, at least) allow the player some respite. As an example, if you play a BR, you finish the match and there is no need to start the next one straight away. In a persistent MMO, with essentially open PvP, this is not always going to be an option. If you are in an area where you can be attacked, you need to maintain a heightened state of readiness in order to deal with that attack when it comes. This leads me to believe that the players that want to compete at the top end in Ashes will all spec largely towards the tab target based abilities - at least for the first few things they will want to do in combat - as very few people would be able to physically maintain that heightened state of readiness for that length of time. There are many ways this could play out post launch when players inevitably complain that tab target players have the advantage, all I know is that there will have to be changes to make action combat less reliant on initial reflexes than it is in other action games.
Adoribus wrote: » noaani wrote: » Almost all action games out there (all that I know of, at least) allow the player some respite. As an example, if you play a BR, you finish the match and there is no need to start the next one straight away. In a persistent MMO, with essentially open PvP, this is not always going to be an option. If you are in an area where you can be attacked, you need to maintain a heightened state of readiness in order to deal with that attack when it comes. This leads me to believe that the players that want to compete at the top end in Ashes will all spec largely towards the tab target based abilities - at least for the first few things they will want to do in combat - as very few people would be able to physically maintain that heightened state of readiness for that length of time. There are many ways this could play out post launch when players inevitably complain that tab target players have the advantage, all I know is that there will have to be changes to make action combat less reliant on initial reflexes than it is in other action games. Hm interesting argument. It can be hard for the player to focus for long periods of time yes. But we won't be fighting 24/7. There's much to do. When we do fight however, I'd want to focus as much as possible.
noaani wrote: » Adoribus wrote: » noaani wrote: » Almost all action games out there (all that I know of, at least) allow the player some respite. As an example, if you play a BR, you finish the match and there is no need to start the next one straight away. In a persistent MMO, with essentially open PvP, this is not always going to be an option. If you are in an area where you can be attacked, you need to maintain a heightened state of readiness in order to deal with that attack when it comes. This leads me to believe that the players that want to compete at the top end in Ashes will all spec largely towards the tab target based abilities - at least for the first few things they will want to do in combat - as very few people would be able to physically maintain that heightened state of readiness for that length of time. There are many ways this could play out post launch when players inevitably complain that tab target players have the advantage, all I know is that there will have to be changes to make action combat less reliant on initial reflexes than it is in other action games. Hm interesting argument. It can be hard for the player to focus for long periods of time yes. But we won't be fighting 24/7. There's much to do. When we do fight however, I'd want to focus as much as possible. Being ready for action combat and being ready for tab combat are very different things.
noaani wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » noaani wrote: » The argument here isn't so much about "this is how it's always been, why change it", so much as there are a number of people arguing for change whom have quite clearly never actually played a tab target game in the manner it was intended to be played. I'm the opposite, I grew up on tab target mmos and don't like the number of binds you have to set up for targets, especially at the high level where you are making macros that both target and use abilities. I much prefer to just look at my target then set up a bunch of hot keys to switch around. I'm not a fan of any macro that both targets and uses an ability either. I can think of a few raid encounters where target macros (is, /target [specific mob name]) is useful, but in all situations that I can think of, there are ways to target the specific mob using the games built in target system (targeting the most recent mob to add you or your allies to their threat list deals with almost all of these situations). This isn't a coincidence either, game developers develop content around the tools they have given players, if those tools include a robust target acquisition system, they will add in ways in which using that system correctly makes you a better player. The fact that many players opt to cheese the content via macros is the fault of those players. Edit to add; this is why I am kind of apprehensive about the combat system in Ashes. Rather than the end result being that players can pick and choose how they want to fight, I think what will happen is that the developers will have to develop content that takes the limitations of both systems in to account. They won't be able to develop content that requires players to correctly use a targeting system if they don't require players to even use that targeting system. The end result, I think, is going to be that no matter whether you opt for action or tab combat, the content itself will be limited.
wolfwood82 wrote: » noaani wrote: » Adoribus wrote: » noaani wrote: » Almost all action games out there (all that I know of, at least) allow the player some respite. As an example, if you play a BR, you finish the match and there is no need to start the next one straight away. In a persistent MMO, with essentially open PvP, this is not always going to be an option. If you are in an area where you can be attacked, you need to maintain a heightened state of readiness in order to deal with that attack when it comes. This leads me to believe that the players that want to compete at the top end in Ashes will all spec largely towards the tab target based abilities - at least for the first few things they will want to do in combat - as very few people would be able to physically maintain that heightened state of readiness for that length of time. There are many ways this could play out post launch when players inevitably complain that tab target players have the advantage, all I know is that there will have to be changes to make action combat less reliant on initial reflexes than it is in other action games. Hm interesting argument. It can be hard for the player to focus for long periods of time yes. But we won't be fighting 24/7. There's much to do. When we do fight however, I'd want to focus as much as possible. Being ready for action combat and being ready for tab combat are very different things. Not really. Being ready for combat just means higher tension and anxiety. Combat hasn't actually started yet, so there's know real difference between the two systems. It's also an irrelevant case for AoC because you can be ready with TAB abilities for quick responses to an ambush rather then being forced to "be ready for action combat". Action combat is more engaging though, so it's more mentally fatiguing. You're correct about prolonged periods of it being tiring, but it's viable exercise believe it or not. Meaning if you stick to prolonged periods of action combat, you'll eventually acclimate to it and be "stronger" mentally.
mcstackerson wrote: » Encounters in tab games don't get their difficulty from the tab system itself and instead the difficulty comes from other aspects of the combat.
