Why is tab target, or the original combat style in MMOs, so alienated now?

I played New World beta this weekend. It's not for me. I hated the combat.

To be frank, I have hated the way combat has been going in MMOs for many years now. I come from Everquest; the tab target games of old. I loved the combat in EQ, but I can understand a need to modernise it.

For me, the combat in SWTOR was fantastic. It felt fluid and engrossing, despite being tab target still.

In recent years the change has happened.

First we got Guild Wars 2; a game that, for me, seemed to be all about jumping around like a bloody kangaroo. ESO wasn't so bad. Wildstar was even worse than GW2.

New World's combat is about as far from my comfort zone as it is possible to get. It was like a bad nightmare for me and as far from the likes of EQ, EQ2 or SWTOR as I believe it is possible to get.

I'm middle aged with the coordination of an blind Elephant with its legs tied together. Tab target combat gave me something I could enjoy and keep up with. I bought an MMO mouse and felt I did well at combat in SWTOR. I had to move on from a button masher to using keyboard/mouse.

I'm glad Ashes is trying to develop a hybrid system, but the one thing that always made me nervous was that Intrepid wanted some form of action combat.

I just feel like MMOs are getting further and further away from something I like and enjoy to something for the skill enabled kids of the 2000s.

I'll continue to have fait in Ashes because the game seems to be endeavouring to offer something aside from combat. I can be an artisan alone. I do want to enjoy some combat though. I remember Vanguard and the ability to be an artisan solely in that game. There was a mix with combat though and you had to go to some dangerous areas to acquire rare items or finding artisan camps.

So, is it a younger generation thing? Are us old farts just out of luck now? Do I have to adapt?

This action combat is not going away, is it?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

CROW3

Noaani wrote: »

The two drinks may seem very different to you, but they are 99% the same.

ArcticFoxAD

Well anyone trying to escape eso lag. If rng an tab targeting wins we'll be screwed. I can't understand having my hand held. I'd much rather play based on skill in a fast paced action combat then boring Pokémon battles. This isn't mmorpgs 20 years ago. This is mmorpgs today. Ashes could pull a good amount of the eso community if they make the combat feel similar without the lag. I'm 34 years old and do fine against the 17yo no lifers. That fast paced, low cooldown, animation canceling combat is awesome. Don't forget the amount of pvp that's supposed to be present in ashes. Pvp gets boring fast when it lacks skill.

Nerror

Debating if New World is an RPG or not isn't going to solve anything, nor does it really matter. It's doesn't prove anything either way. To me the NW combat looks pretty meh tbh. Been watching the PvP streams and the combat seems laggy, messy and uninspired, but I need to actually try it myself to really form an opinion.

The current combat in Ashes fits the genre completely. I think that's important. I hope they implement a good hybrid system, but if it turns out to be impossible to get it right for launch, tab target (and stat-based evade/block chance) is the way to go on top of the active dodge mechanic we also get.

More importantly, the technology just isn't there for pure action combat in Ashes. I mean, it's currently not even there for New World, and they only do 50v50 in their wars. It's clearly laggy and desync-y in NW at the moment. Hopefully they can improve that, but the problem with any action based PvP game is that if you have a ping of 150+ or so, and your opponent has 70 ping, you're at a real disadvantage.

Ashes is going for 250v250 as a minimum, and trying to push towards 500v500. There is just no way in hell we are going to get acceptably smooth pure action combat with 500-1000 players in a relatively small area with the type of weapons and skills Ashes has. Not even Planetside 2 manages that without issues.

Tab target mitigates a lot of the issues in large scale combat and for people with sub-optimal ping, and makes it playable. If Intrepid went with pure action combat, it would be an absolute shitshow in the most important events in the game, and that would probably kill the game.

Edit: the animation cancelling combat of ESO is a horrible way to do combat IMO. It just leads to people trying to use macros to help with the weaving, and it's still just rotation based combat when you boil it down.

Dreoh

@Nerror The New World being an RPG debate does actually matter, because people are arguing that an MMORPG is only an MMORPG if it isn't an entirely skill-based combat system, like New World is.

New World is obviously an MMORPG to anyone who's played it or actually understands what it is.

You're right about latency stuff, as that can ruin any skill-based combat system. New World's combat is very good (and doesn't have any random elements in it), it's just that when there is lag it is bad.

But this thread is about why people are seeking action combat over the traditional Tab Targeting systems, not about which is more viable.

Noaani

Dreoh wrote: »

You're right about latency stuff, as that can ruin any skill-based combat system. New World's combat is very good (and doesn't have any random elements in it), it's just that when there is lag it is bad.

I've not played the game yet,but even I know it has random elements.

The game has crits, and there is a chance of them occurring.

This is a random element, much the same as random elements in tab target based MMO's. In fact, crit is arguably the biggest factor in terms of RNG in MMO's

Dreoh

Noaani wrote: »

Dreoh wrote: »

You're right about latency stuff, as that can ruin any skill-based combat system. New World's combat is very good (and doesn't have any random elements in it), it's just that when there is lag it is bad.

I've not played the game yet,but even I know it has random elements.

The game has crits, and there is a chance of them occurring.

This is a random element, much the same as random elements in tab target based MMO's. In fact, crit is arguably the biggest factor in terms of RNG in MMO's

The game has crit points and crit angles.

You crit by headshotting or attacking from behind.

But yes, all attacks do have a minor random base chance to crit, but it's minor enough to be negligable.

It's nothing like "chance for your attack to completely be negated by dodge chance" levels of ridiculousness. It's literally just enough for people to still get that "Gamba dopamine hit" when big numbers pop up.

And even so, the game would still be entirely viable and still also be an MMORPG if there was no crit chance. There would be almost no difference whatsoever.

Noaani

Dreoh wrote: »

It's nothing like "chance for your attack to completely be negated by dodge chance" levels of ridiculousness.

Tab target games pretty much only ever see this happen if you are improperly geared, or taking on an enemy that is too high a level. It is not a normal part of "good" tab target games.

You can't really misuse a game system (improperly gearing yourself in a tab target game) and then pass judgement on it.

As I said to another poster, this is like me saying action combat systems are bad because it takes so long to aim using the cursor keys.

In both cases, if you misuse the system, you are going to be left with a bad taste.

Also, I am not interested in the debate as to whether New World is an RPG or not - as far as I am concerned that is one of the stupidest debates I have seen on these forums. I mean, the fact that New World does indeed have RNG elements to it completely negates the discussion anyway, but it is still a pointless, stupid discussion (Dygz bought it up, didn't he?).

Zeric

Dreoh wrote: »

The entire reason I dislike basic Tab Target is because I don't like the skilllessness of it. There's no "I need to practice my aim", it's entirely "I need to practice the order I press buttons in". The latter being something extremely dull to me. I liken it to learning a guitar hero song, and every fight is just repeating that same guitar hero song every time forever.
Granted I know tab target could be less about rotations and have all situational abilities, but nearly every tab target game is about rotations.

Either you need to define what exactly "rotations" are or you need to accept that action combat can be just as much about "rotations" as tab-targeting.
Assuming you would define "rotations" the same as I am thinking you would, it is not tab-targeting systems that you have a problem with. It is "rotation" """gameplay""" that you have a problem with.

Dreoh wrote: »

I also despise the thought of leaving whether I win or lose up to RNG, even if it's minor. Dodge chance, accuracy change, etc. are all trash mechanics to me. I want to win on my own merits, not on the merits of the Mathf.Random() function.

Are you saying that Poker is a skill-less game; where winning is all left to the luck of the draw? That no poker tournemnent winners ever won on their own merits?
And again, assuming you are not saying that; then what you have a problem with is not RNG in itself, but the manner it is used.

Dreoh

Zeric wrote: »

Dreoh wrote: »

The entire reason I dislike basic Tab Target is because I don't like the skilllessness of it. There's no "I need to practice my aim", it's entirely "I need to practice the order I press buttons in". The latter being something extremely dull to me. I liken it to learning a guitar hero song, and every fight is just repeating that same guitar hero song every time forever.
Granted I know tab target could be less about rotations and have all situational abilities, but nearly every tab target game is about rotations.

Either you need to define what exactly "rotations" are or you need to accept that action combat can be just as much about "rotations" as tab-targeting.
Assuming you would define "rotations" the same as I am thinking you would, it is not tab-targeting systems that you have a problem with. It is "rotation" """gameplay""" that you have a problem with.

Dreoh wrote: »

I also despise the thought of leaving whether I win or lose up to RNG, even if it's minor. Dodge chance, accuracy change, etc. are all trash mechanics to me. I want to win on my own merits, not on the merits of the Mathf.Random() function.

Are you saying that Poker is a skill-less game; where winning is all left to the luck of the draw? That no poker tournemnent winners ever won on their own merits?
And again, assuming you are not saying that; then what you have a problem with is not RNG in itself, but the manner it is used.

Why would I need to define rotations? We all have a good understanding of what that means.
But if you insist, it's "The optimal sequence in which to use your abilities for maximum desired class effectiveness in the majority of scenarios"

And you're right, it is rotation-based gameplay that I have a problem with... like I said... in the comment you quoted me on. I literally say it right there, assuming you're not going to be incredibly pedantic about how I worded it.

"Nearly every tab target game uses rotations". There are a few that don't have standardized rotations by making sure abilities have creative uses or by limiting the number of abilities you have or various other means.

As for your second "gotcha" comment, Poker (just like basic Tab Target combat) requires a level of skill, but whether you win or lose could be entirely up to the gamble. Even if you play perfectly you could be dealt a bad hand.

And no, I do have a problem with RNG itself.
I think if you can build a competent combat system without RNG, it's far superior to any RNG-based combat system. Less interesting in some cases yes, but winning or losing is entirely dependent upon the winners merits.
Sure, RNG gives that chance for things to turn out in unexpected ways, but you can never be 100% sure whether you won of your own merits, or you just rolled the dice poorly.
If I'm looking to have fun and not take things seriously, I'm ok with RNG, because it creates unique scenarios through random interactions.
If I'm looking to take something seriously, why would I allow any considerable amount of RNG?

Competitive Smash Bros. players play with items turned off and on basic stages for a reason.
When they want to have fun, they turn them back on.

Before you get pedantic, obviously it's not black and white, and a little bit of chance doesn't tilt the balance too much.

Azherae

Dreoh wrote: »

Zeric wrote: »

Dreoh wrote: »

The entire reason I dislike basic Tab Target is because I don't like the skilllessness of it. There's no "I need to practice my aim", it's entirely "I need to practice the order I press buttons in". The latter being something extremely dull to me. I liken it to learning a guitar hero song, and every fight is just repeating that same guitar hero song every time forever.
Granted I know tab target could be less about rotations and have all situational abilities, but nearly every tab target game is about rotations.

Either you need to define what exactly "rotations" are or you need to accept that action combat can be just as much about "rotations" as tab-targeting.
Assuming you would define "rotations" the same as I am thinking you would, it is not tab-targeting systems that you have a problem with. It is "rotation" """gameplay""" that you have a problem with.

Dreoh wrote: »

I also despise the thought of leaving whether I win or lose up to RNG, even if it's minor. Dodge chance, accuracy change, etc. are all trash mechanics to me. I want to win on my own merits, not on the merits of the Mathf.Random() function.

Are you saying that Poker is a skill-less game; where winning is all left to the luck of the draw? That no poker tournemnent winners ever won on their own merits?
And again, assuming you are not saying that; then what you have a problem with is not RNG in itself, but the manner it is used.

Why would I need to define rotations? We all have a good understanding of what that means.
But if you insist, it's "The optimal sequence in which to use your abilities for maximum desired class effectiveness in the majority of scenarios"

And you're right, it is rotation-based gameplay that I have a problem with... like I said... in the comment you quoted me on. I literally say it right there, assuming you're not going to be incredibly pedantic about how I worded it.

"Nearly every tab target game uses rotations". There are a few that don't have standardized rotations by making sure abilities have creative uses or by limiting the number of abilities you have or various other means.

As for your second "gotcha" comment, Poker (just like basic Tab Target combat) requires a level of skill, but whether you win or lose could be entirely up to the gamble. Even if you play perfectly you could be dealt a bad hand.

And no, I do have a problem with RNG itself.
I think if you can build a competent combat system without RNG, it's far superior to any RNG-based combat system. Less interesting in some cases yes, but winning or losing is entirely dependent upon the winners merits.
Sure, RNG gives that chance for things to turn out in unexpected ways, but you can never be 100% sure whether you won of your own merits, or you just rolled the dice poorly.
If I'm looking to have fun and not take things seriously, I'm ok with RNG, because it creates unique scenarios through random interactions.
If I'm looking to take something seriously, why would I allow any considerable amount of RNG?

Competitive Smash Bros. players play with items turned off and on basic stages for a reason.
When they want to have fun, they turn them back on.

Before you get pedantic, obviously it's not black and white, and a little bit of chance doesn't tilt the balance too much.

To be clear, when you say this, you mean 'RNG outside of the human element', correct?

Like, if your opponent can 'dodge left', 'dodge right', or 'stand still', and you can't possibly react in time to actually know which will happen, but you guess correctly or through understanding of their psychology or something, this is still 'random', but it's obviously not 'RNG' because the 'number generator' part is 'missing'. It's a person, not a program counter or a dice roll.

As always, gotta check.

Dreoh

Yea exactly

The skill in poker is the skill to bluff or knowing the probabilities, or even counting cards.
The RNG is the fact that the deck could be shuffled in a billion different ways and the hand you get is entirely out of anyone's control, and you could just be screwed out of any decent hand. You could bluff your way to victory even with that hand, but you wouldn't need to bluff so hard if you had a good hand.
That is, unless you are gaming your opponents to put more in the pot I guess.

My opponent can dodge left, dodge right or stand still.
But so can I.
We are on even terms. (Obviously in gaming this gets infinitely more complex with class balance and whatnot)
And for anyone who's played fighting games competitively or played any pvp game against an opponent, you know how you begin to be able to predict what they're going to do, and it becomes a back and forth of prediction and reaction.
In any skill-based ability, there's the mechanical skill of aiming correctly, but also the predictive skill of understanding that the opponent is going to be where you're aiming when the skill gets there.

It becomes RNG when whether my action succeeds or fails based on something outside of either of ours, or anyone interfering's, control. This does not mean there is no room for any amount of RNG, as RNG in minor amounts doesn't really affect outcomes too much.

This is getting a little more off topic than I intended though lol, sorry for that.

Nerror

Dreoh wrote: »

@Nerror The New World being an RPG debate does actually matter, because people are arguing that an MMORPG is only an MMORPG if it isn't an entirely skill-based combat system, like New World is.

New World is obviously an MMORPG to anyone who's played it or actually understands what it is.

I just don't really see the point for this discussion I guess.

What matters to me is that Ashes is an MMORPG with strong RPG elements, and the RPG part means that you are playing a character with a different mind and skill-set than you the player. That's the whole core concept of roleplaying another character. You are not playing an extension of yourself. Your character might be a master smith, where you the player don't know which end of the hammer is what. You the player might be awesome at melee combat and dodging and weaving, where the character you are playing would just stand there like a dumb ox. The only way to really emulate the RPG elements are through character stats and the dice roll. Again, unless we are going purely story-based and the DM/GM decides everything as you go.

The more you remove the part where you are playing a character with a different skill-set than yourself, the less RPG the game is.

Dreoh wrote: »

You're right about latency stuff, as that can ruin any skill-based combat system. New World's combat is very good (and doesn't have any random elements in it), it's just that when there is lag it is bad.

But this thread is about why people are seeking action combat over the traditional Tab Targeting systems, not about which is more viable.

To me they are very connected though. Part of the reason I like tab is that I don't have to deal with the BS that is placing the reticle right in the opponents face and clicking, only for them to be to the side according to the server, which makes me miss. Latency/desyncing sucks and I want to avoid that. I like big chaotic battles with hundreds of players, and I don't want them ruined by a desync hell. Tab targetting just works.

I really enjoyed BDO combat actually. It went to shit in the larger battles though, because they also suffer from those same desync problems. At the risk of repeating myself, for Ashes we are going to have 400+ players all gunning for a single point in the throne room to capture the castle, with another 100+ running around nearby trying to take control points and what not. Relying on the netcode and client to accurately hit another moving player in that environment by aiming at them is a recipe for disappointment.

Edit: Likewise for the dodge and evasion character stats. I, the player, might not even see an attack coming due to latency, low FPS or a suboptimal culling system in large battles, where my dodgy rogue character would see it coming a mile a way. I want a chance to dodge or resist that attack.

ArcticFoxAD

Nerror I do agree with your point about latency, any eso player knows about desync. ESO for example does have a tab target system. You have the option to point a reticle and fire a skill or tab to target a specific player and your actions focus that player. Something similar to an action combat with a tab targeting available wouldn't be bad by any means. Rng in combat sucks, at least from a pvp perspective. If I position myself right and in a more skillful manner then my opponent then my burst should hit, period. Wtf if the point of getting good at positioning and strategic gameplay if rng is gonna kill your burst despite your effort. It really is a l2p issue and people shouldn't have their hands held in a pvp environment.

Zeric

Dreoh wrote: »

"The optimal sequence in which to use your abilities for maximum desired class effectiveness in the majority of scenarios,"

I figured you would have that definition but I did not want to assume due to you conflating tab-targeting and rotation gameplay.

Dreoh wrote: »

"Nearly every tab target game uses rotations". There are a few that don't have standardized rotations by making sure abilities have creative uses or by limiting the number of abilities you have or various other means.

This is the only issue I have with what you're saying. And it is not pedantic to differentiate between two things that are meaningfully different.
Rotation gameplay and tab-targeting systems are not interchangeable concepts. Tab-targeting systems do not require rotation gameplay to function, nor is it necessarily the best way to utilize the tab-targeting system. It does not matter if "nearly every tab target game uses rotations." If you hate rotation gameplay, complain about rotation gameplay, not tab-targeting.

Rotation gameplay gets mixed into action combat just as much. However, either the rotations take too long to cycle to be recognized as rotation gameplay, or the rotations are enjoyable. Because, "The optimal sequence in which to use your abilities for maximum desired class effectiveness in the majority of scenarios," is an extremely broad definition.
Black Desert Online, an "action combat" style game, that uses rotation gameplay. Do you also hate BDO combat as well?
Combos would also fall under the given definition of rotation gameplay. Do you hate having combos as well?
Any time you are attempting to create an "optimal sequence" you will invariably end up with a rotation. As such, I would even go so far as to say you don't hate rotation gameplay, in and of itself. You hate the tedious and rote versions of rotation gameplay. Having said that, that argument would be a pedantic argument.

And I will admit the following could be considered pedantic, however, I do believe there is a substantive enough difference to merit discussion and it is completely on topic with the thread, "Why is tab target, or the original combat style in MMOs, so alienated now?" Which my argument to answer the topic would be the misuse and misunderstanding of rotation gameplay and RNG systems.

As far as RNG goes, everything you are saying, suggests, to me, that you go more into the direction of hating the, "lol i so random" types of RNG and not so much RNG in and of itself.
What I mean by this is; you hate RNG when it is an unpredictable element. But would be okay with it if it was something that could be planned around.

Here are a few examples to help clarify the differences in RNG types:
Example one: A weapon has a damage rating of 7-10dmg on hit, an enemy of 100HP dies in 10-14 hits.
Example two: the same weapon but also having a 10%crit chance with 100%crit damage. Meaning the same 100HP enemy could die in 5-14 hits.
Example three: the same weapon, however without crit chance, but the enemy now has 10% evasion. Meaning it could take 10-Infinity hits to kill.

Example one: The damage may be random but you will always know the maximum hits required to kill. Very little control is taken from the player.
Example two: You might kill the enemy faster or it might take the normal amount of time. Some control is taken away from the player.
Example three: You can no longer predict the necessary amount of hits required to kill the enemy.

Most people who say they hate RNG are only thinking of example three, where control is taken out of the player's hand.
What you have said thus far suggests you would hate examples two and three.
Do you also hate example one?

Catmonkey

nidriks wrote: »

So, is it a younger generation thing? Are us old farts just out of luck now? Do I have to adapt?

I don't think it's an age thing. I'm 52 and still play FPS games like Overwatch (of course OW doesn't rely on aim for all heroes or abilities). The New World combat seems fine to me, indeed it's not that different from some classes in tab-targeting games I'd say. (Thinking of something like a WoW rogue, which IIRC can move through all abilities).

I recall liking the Age of Conan (the original AoC

) combat system. It was still tab targeting, but did require some thinking about which direction to attack from, and had combo sequences that led to bigger attacks.

nidriks

mr n0body wrote: »

Because there is not a single advantage of tab-targeting, is there?

it is annoying to have multiple enemies and have to press tab 342432 times until you are facing the right one. And clicking with the mouse limits your camera movement.

Especially in pvp: targeting one enemy that gets out of range, just for another one to come close and your hero does nothing.

Tab targeting was a limitation of old games, but it has no place in this new age where we can make combat more fluid.

When you try to punch someone, do you first "select your target" or do you simply swing? And if one enemy gets out of your way, why should your swing not hit the other dude behind him?

I played wow since original vanilla before TBC, I gladly move away from this old system.

No, the fault is yours for having a total ignorance and understanding of the basics of tab target combat. I know you're ignorant of this because you flash numbers like 342432. If you have 300k mobs after you then you're just not very good at the game...simple.

I'm not blind to innovation, but I'm also fully aware of how MMOs have stagnated in all the things that made them great at once point. Sociality and immersion. Modern MMO developers are so focused on trying to recreate combat of games like Dark Souls or Witcher that they forget there is more to an MMO.

nidriks

I meant to check this thread again in the past few days. I'm surprised it went as far as it did. At first I felt it branched off of my topic in to RNG, but I suppose RNG has a part in tab target. It's just not the whole because tab target combat can be so much more complicated than designing a system that has you use your mouse to swing. Either way I am sure there has to be some RNG in how the punch is detected and how much damage it does. In my mind, RNG is a variation factor that makes games more interesting. You fire off a perfect arrow shot and do critical damage or your grip slips and you fluff the shot, hitting a tree. For me, action combat doesn't represent that well enough. It's dependent on skill of the player, as I accept real world combat would be, but for me that's not in the spirit of what should be a social game. This ain't the Witcher or Chivalry. It's a social experience where we make our life journey through a new world.

For me, the favour of action combat over tab target has had a major detriment to the diversity of MMOs. Everquest was my first experience. I don't want the combat of EQ back. A, I realise we're past that and, b, I actually tried the vanilla servers SOE made and struggled with the combat after playing newer MMOs. What I want back is that feeling of 'being there', the variation in the classes and the feel that you were part of a living, breathing world.

Tab target allows a variation in classes that action MMOs simply can not compete with. That is why MMOs of the last 5-10 years have such simple classes that lack imagination or interesting mechanics. Games like EQ2, Vanguard and SWTOR had amazingly fun combat that was accompanied by amazing classes. EQ2's conjuror, Vanguard's blood mage, disciple or psionicist and SWTOR's incredible imperial agent. We can also go back to games like EQ that had classes like the enchanter (a role sadly missing in MMOs because action combat doesn't really work for it) and non-combat classes in SWG.

Look at classes in modern Asian MMOs. You generally get a tank, an archer, some guy with twin swords, a healer and a mage. Some MMOs did away with healers to let everyone self heal; GW2 and Rift. Class design has died because developers are too intent upon making their combat action based. That doesn't leave room for mezzes.

Even buffing has died a death. I have been playing FF14 and there's so little in the way of buffing. I have such happy memories of getting a quick spirit of the wolf from a higher level in EQ. Travelling to Plane of Knowledge to pay for a group C3. Travelling to my local doctor in SWG to get a buff that would last me hours of gametime. SWG even had dancers you could sit and watch to get a buff. You could tip the doctors and dancers even though they were offline.

MMOs have lost that. They've now become the same old 'let's beat WOW' model. Less classes seem to be favoured over making the combat the focal point. Combat should be part of the journey. Not the journey.

I'm not against some action, but MMOs should not become dependent on spacial skill. At the risk of repeating myself, MMOs should be about the diveristy of the classes, an immersive world and the memories of meeting and making friends.

Watching the stream the other day, I was actually happy with what Steven was shjowing us in terms of combat. It allowed freedome of movement but seemed to merge in the tab target of skills. If they can work on that maybe I can be happy with the combat. I wasn't totally against the combat in ESO. GW2 and Wildstar got boring fast though. The classes lacked imagination (doing away with the trinity was horrendous) and the jumping about got old fast. New World was just horrendous and the fact that animations couldn't be cancelled was, for me, symptomatic of trying to fit action combat into an MMO setting.

Real fighters don't jump about like Taz or the Roadrunner. They charge in to battle and pick their targets. They don't just swing about like a mad man or a sneaky little guy creeps in from behind and sticks a blade in their ribs. You know, the guy pickimg his target.

Tab Target still has a role to play. For people to dismiss it so frivolously, as many in this thread have, shows how far MMOs have travelled from their origins. I've seen many ways in which Ashes seems to be trying to claim that back. It's why I was so drawn to this MMO around Christmas 2016. It's why I was sat waiting to back the Kickstarter on day one and can proudly call myself the 150th backer of Ashes.

I hope Steven and the Intrepid team continue to endeavour to make tab target a part of the combat in Ashes. It doesn't have to be the all. I realise MMOs have to change, but the old spirit of MMOs needs to remain the senior partner or we continue to lose all the diversity that we have lost from MMOs in the past 10 years plus. A hybrid system can be good, but choice is better. Some seem unwilling to have anything but action combat, from what I am reading. I hope Intrepid continue to listen to all.

At the end of the day I can always just be a crafter if the truly living , breathing world that Steven promised gleams into life. I'd ratehr not avoid combat entirely though. I can't take another GW2, Wildstar or New World though. I want blood mages, disciples, imperial agents and enchanters against. I want classes that all feel varied again. Wonderful class design was what made the old MMOs so great and such a happy place to be. It's why I cherish memories of EQ. One of the few things I really remember from recent MMOs is the huge numbers of enemy coming over the hill in ESO or a few interesting quests in the action combat heavy MMOs.

Dungeons have also become bland. But that's a topic for another day.

Dreoh

nidriks wrote: »

This ain't the Witcher or Chivalry

I'm going to stop right there because I want to ask you why you think MMO's can't or shouldn't be like either of those games?

It absolutely sounds like you just don't want change, and you want every MMO to fall in line with the gameplay of the previous MMO's, with only room for innovation inside the arbitrary box you've built up for it.

The thing is, the existence of Action Combat MMO's does not remove the existence of Tab Target MMO's like some people, including you, are implying.

Child Item