Dygz wrote: » RPGs were not designed for PvP. MMORPGs typically had PvP in them as an after-thought. MMORPGs are RPGs before they are PvP games... and RNG is a fundamental element of RPGs. Gamers wanted MMORPGs to have PvP - which they weren't really designed for - and that's why there are then complaints about class nerfs and re-balancing of 1v1 PvP combat....and RNG.
Guli wrote: » Good that people have different thoughts on this, we need to figure this out sooner than later. also i thought about it some more, and what if CC has 100% hit rate (if not rolled/shielded etc) but you could modify your gear/use skills that shorten the amount of time you are affected by the CC.
Vhaeyne wrote: » Guli wrote: » Good that people have different thoughts on this, we need to figure this out sooner than later. also i thought about it some more, and what if CC has 100% hit rate (if not rolled/shielded etc) but you could modify your gear/use skills that shorten the amount of time you are affected by the CC. In the case of action combat skills with the "Hard CCs" I think that is the intention. 100% hit rate if your projectile collides with the other player's hit box. After that, post hit stats would still be in play.
Vhaeyne wrote: » As someone who was very skeptical of Ashes early on. This bit from the Wiki is part of what sold me on Ashes. For the purposes of balance, certain skill types will be either tab or action oriented skills. For example:[29] Hard CCs may be housed in action oriented skills because they are skill shots that are more difficult to land.[29][26] Softer CC's would be housed in tab-targeted abilities.[29] I think this relates to the topic very well. Skill shots as I understand the term should act outside the RPG RNG hit/miss system. Stats should not be involved for these skills. As a player, I proved I hit my target when I aimed for it. My target failed his dodge/evasion check when I hit him. My hope would be that for these "Hard CCs" they would have long cool downs and small hit boxes to land, but no saving throws. "Soft CCs" would have all of the normal RPG stats. They would still be useful, but just weaker (Shorter CC times, and they would land less often). If they make an action combat system where you can land a CC and nothing happens because RNG and stats. Then they have just made a class of skills that will not get used. Not fully skills matter more than luck like OP wants because RPG RNG is still a poison in the combat system. Unless they limit CC to only action moves(Which, I think, would be great). The way I read the quotes from the wiki above, it looks like a compromise at least.
For the purposes of balance, certain skill types will be either tab or action oriented skills. For example:[29] Hard CCs may be housed in action oriented skills because they are skill shots that are more difficult to land.[29][26] Softer CC's would be housed in tab-targeted abilities.[29]
truely wrote: » Guli wrote: » Good that people have different thoughts on this, we need to figure this out sooner than later. also i thought about it some more, and what if CC has 100% hit rate (if not rolled/shielded etc) but you could modify your gear/use skills that shorten the amount of time you are affected by the CC. I think that's a great solution if the disable% stats affect hard CC length rather than completely nullifying the CC
JustVine wrote: » truely wrote: » Guli wrote: » Good that people have different thoughts on this, we need to figure this out sooner than later. also i thought about it some more, and what if CC has 100% hit rate (if not rolled/shielded etc) but you could modify your gear/use skills that shorten the amount of time you are affected by the CC. I think that's a great solution if the disable% stats affect hard CC length rather than completely nullifying the CC I've only seen this work in fighting game strategy level champion fighters. Ashes is neither a champion fighter nor do people seem to want this to be fighting game level design balance (after all we are talking about ashes having hard cc here which in itself negates two layers of fighting game style strategy.) Name a mmo this solution has ever made stun not a stagnating/build restricting factor in the meta or not a free win.
truely wrote: » JustVine wrote: » truely wrote: » Guli wrote: » Good that people have different thoughts on this, we need to figure this out sooner than later. also i thought about it some more, and what if CC has 100% hit rate (if not rolled/shielded etc) but you could modify your gear/use skills that shorten the amount of time you are affected by the CC. I think that's a great solution if the disable% stats affect hard CC length rather than completely nullifying the CC I've only seen this work in fighting game strategy level champion fighters. Ashes is neither a champion fighter nor do people seem to want this to be fighting game level design balance (after all we are talking about ashes having hard cc here which in itself negates two layers of fighting game style strategy.) Name a mmo this solution has ever made stun not a stagnating/build restricting factor in the meta or not a free win. what's your point, that there should be no hard CCs? Pretty sure GW2 has hard CCs and it's not a CC stun lock auto win.
JustVine wrote: » Vhaeyne wrote: » As someone who was very skeptical of Ashes early on. This bit from the Wiki is part of what sold me on Ashes. For the purposes of balance, certain skill types will be either tab or action oriented skills. For example:[29] Hard CCs may be housed in action oriented skills because they are skill shots that are more difficult to land.[29][26] Softer CC's would be housed in tab-targeted abilities.[29] I think this relates to the topic very well. Skill shots as I understand the term should act outside the RPG RNG hit/miss system. Stats should not be involved for these skills. As a player, I proved I hit my target when I aimed for it. My target failed his dodge/evasion check when I hit him. My hope would be that for these "Hard CCs" they would have long cool downs and small hit boxes to land, but no saving throws. "Soft CCs" would have all of the normal RPG stats. They would still be useful, but just weaker (Shorter CC times, and they would land less often). If they make an action combat system where you can land a CC and nothing happens because RNG and stats. Then they have just made a class of skills that will not get used. Not fully skills matter more than luck like OP wants because RPG RNG is still a poison in the combat system. Unless they limit CC to only action moves(Which, I think, would be great). The way I read the quotes from the wiki above, it looks like a compromise at least. I wasn't planning on responding further in this thread but since you are here and shared some reasonable perspective as usual I will respond. I feel it will absolutely get used. 'Lose a turn' would have to be rediculosly low odds for people to not use it, the skill shot will probably just make it unpopular at lower skill levels, while still dominating the meta at higher skill levels. Even with a long cooldown (which I fully support them having if they are going to have stun.) In any meaningful form of pvp it is free buckets of damage due to Ashes high time to kill. I doubt adding a skillshot to the hard cc will address the problems of hard cc in the same way rng doesn't. Skillshots generally have about the same accuracy if not better in champion fighters for example as the generally designed rng odds for stun (50 worse 70ish best). And even if it is, the frequency is probably closer to what the rng odds would be, it's just with the 'chance' of it being 100% Here is why: Think about who gets hard cc traditionally. Fighters, Tanks, Ranger, Mage (and summoner by nature of their job usually gets a summon with it but let's exclude them given how little we know of their intended design) Two front liners who can negate movement abilities in some way, by either closing distance or pulling back. Two backliners who have big burst damage and no reason to not just open with stun into big burst damage. Now by nature when you make a high cooldown skill, as a game designer you need the player to still have meaningful odds in an encounter, because it isnt fun to be maimed waiting for a key ability right? So they still need a strong kit without stun. You can't really lock a ranger's or mage's burst damage behind one skill either. Usually they have multiple. So the stun is probably not going to come at the cost of their ability to delete. The skill shot for these classes is almost assuredly easy for them with a bit of practice. Fighters and Tanks otoh have slightly less high burst damage right? But because they have strong stickiness, and the ability to pull you back/pounce your movement ability if you mash out after the timer, you now not only have half your health missing, but just 'wasted' your movement ability and are rapidly dying. If you stay there, your still at a strong health disadvantage and in a team scenario, probably deleteable. I would argue the skill shot might be slightly harder in this scenario due to the sharper angles in melee, but.... 'shield bash' for example, by nature is usually quick to animate. Same with hamstring etc. Your 'small hit box' idea is a reasonable hope, but I am unsure Ashes is going in the 'small hit box' direction. If they add hard cc it's definitely worth yelling at them about it if the hit boxes are 'normal' I think.
Vhaeyne wrote: » JustVine wrote: » Vhaeyne wrote: » As someone who was very skeptical of Ashes early on. This bit from the Wiki is part of what sold me on Ashes. For the purposes of balance, certain skill types will be either tab or action oriented skills. For example:[29] Hard CCs may be housed in action oriented skills because they are skill shots that are more difficult to land.[29][26] Softer CC's would be housed in tab-targeted abilities.[29] I think this relates to the topic very well. Skill shots as I understand the term should act outside the RPG RNG hit/miss system. Stats should not be involved for these skills. As a player, I proved I hit my target when I aimed for it. My target failed his dodge/evasion check when I hit him. My hope would be that for these "Hard CCs" they would have long cool downs and small hit boxes to land, but no saving throws. "Soft CCs" would have all of the normal RPG stats. They would still be useful, but just weaker (Shorter CC times, and they would land less often). If they make an action combat system where you can land a CC and nothing happens because RNG and stats. Then they have just made a class of skills that will not get used. Not fully skills matter more than luck like OP wants because RPG RNG is still a poison in the combat system. Unless they limit CC to only action moves(Which, I think, would be great). The way I read the quotes from the wiki above, it looks like a compromise at least. I wasn't planning on responding further in this thread but since you are here and shared some reasonable perspective as usual I will respond. I feel it will absolutely get used. 'Lose a turn' would have to be rediculosly low odds for people to not use it, the skill shot will probably just make it unpopular at lower skill levels, while still dominating the meta at higher skill levels. Even with a long cooldown (which I fully support them having if they are going to have stun.) In any meaningful form of pvp it is free buckets of damage due to Ashes high time to kill. I doubt adding a skillshot to the hard cc will address the problems of hard cc in the same way rng doesn't. Skillshots generally have about the same accuracy if not better in champion fighters for example as the generally designed rng odds for stun (50 worse 70ish best). And even if it is, the frequency is probably closer to what the rng odds would be, it's just with the 'chance' of it being 100% Here is why: Think about who gets hard cc traditionally. Fighters, Tanks, Ranger, Mage (and summoner by nature of their job usually gets a summon with it but let's exclude them given how little we know of their intended design) Two front liners who can negate movement abilities in some way, by either closing distance or pulling back. Two backliners who have big burst damage and no reason to not just open with stun into big burst damage. Now by nature when you make a high cooldown skill, as a game designer you need the player to still have meaningful odds in an encounter, because it isnt fun to be maimed waiting for a key ability right? So they still need a strong kit without stun. You can't really lock a ranger's or mage's burst damage behind one skill either. Usually they have multiple. So the stun is probably not going to come at the cost of their ability to delete. The skill shot for these classes is almost assuredly easy for them with a bit of practice. Fighters and Tanks otoh have slightly less high burst damage right? But because they have strong stickiness, and the ability to pull you back/pounce your movement ability if you mash out after the timer, you now not only have half your health missing, but just 'wasted' your movement ability and are rapidly dying. If you stay there, your still at a strong health disadvantage and in a team scenario, probably deleteable. I would argue the skill shot might be slightly harder in this scenario due to the sharper angles in melee, but.... 'shield bash' for example, by nature is usually quick to animate. Same with hamstring etc. Your 'small hit box' idea is a reasonable hope, but I am unsure Ashes is going in the 'small hit box' direction. If they add hard cc it's definitely worth yelling at them about it if the hit boxes are 'normal' I think. You cought me at the end of my day. I'll try to respond about 12-16 hours from now.
JustVine wrote: » truely wrote: » JustVine wrote: » truely wrote: » Guli wrote: » Good that people have different thoughts on this, we need to figure this out sooner than later. also i thought about it some more, and what if CC has 100% hit rate (if not rolled/shielded etc) but you could modify your gear/use skills that shorten the amount of time you are affected by the CC. I think that's a great solution if the disable% stats affect hard CC length rather than completely nullifying the CC I've only seen this work in fighting game strategy level champion fighters. Ashes is neither a champion fighter nor do people seem to want this to be fighting game level design balance (after all we are talking about ashes having hard cc here which in itself negates two layers of fighting game style strategy.) Name a mmo this solution has ever made stun not a stagnating/build restricting factor in the meta or not a free win. what's your point, that there should be no hard CCs? Pretty sure GW2 has hard CCs and it's not a CC stun lock auto win. https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/topic/70706-stun-meta-needs-to-go/ Uhm.....
truely wrote: » Just having passive stats to increase disable % and defense disable % is hardly skillful character building.
truely wrote: » JustVine wrote: » truely wrote: » JustVine wrote: » truely wrote: » Guli wrote: » Good that people have different thoughts on this, we need to figure this out sooner than later. also i thought about it some more, and what if CC has 100% hit rate (if not rolled/shielded etc) but you could modify your gear/use skills that shorten the amount of time you are affected by the CC. I think that's a great solution if the disable% stats affect hard CC length rather than completely nullifying the CC I've only seen this work in fighting game strategy level champion fighters. Ashes is neither a champion fighter nor do people seem to want this to be fighting game level design balance (after all we are talking about ashes having hard cc here which in itself negates two layers of fighting game style strategy.) Name a mmo this solution has ever made stun not a stagnating/build restricting factor in the meta or not a free win. what's your point, that there should be no hard CCs? Pretty sure GW2 has hard CCs and it's not a CC stun lock auto win. https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/topic/70706-stun-meta-needs-to-go/ Uhm..... You always get people moaning about stuff. If you read the post most of the people replying they disagree with the OP. This really doesn't prove anything, having played GW2 myself I can say hard CC isnt a problem in that game.
Noaani wrote: » truely wrote: » Just having passive stats to increase disable % and defense disable % is hardly skillful character building. Being presented with multiple viable options and picking the correct option for your specific situation is skillful character building. The more viable options that are present, the more skill it allows for. In a game like WoW or ESO where there are only a handful of viable options and every member of a given class goes for the same gear set, there are no viable options for class builds. In a game like Ashes, where gear stats are not pre-determined and where you can equip what ever gear you like on your character (and where atypical builds can often give you an advantage in PvP), there is actual, real, tangible skill in creating a build.
JustVine wrote: » truely wrote: » JustVine wrote: » truely wrote: » JustVine wrote: » truely wrote: » Guli wrote: » Good that people have different thoughts on this, we need to figure this out sooner than later. also i thought about it some more, and what if CC has 100% hit rate (if not rolled/shielded etc) but you could modify your gear/use skills that shorten the amount of time you are affected by the CC. I think that's a great solution if the disable% stats affect hard CC length rather than completely nullifying the CC I've only seen this work in fighting game strategy level champion fighters. Ashes is neither a champion fighter nor do people seem to want this to be fighting game level design balance (after all we are talking about ashes having hard cc here which in itself negates two layers of fighting game style strategy.) Name a mmo this solution has ever made stun not a stagnating/build restricting factor in the meta or not a free win. what's your point, that there should be no hard CCs? Pretty sure GW2 has hard CCs and it's not a CC stun lock auto win. https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/topic/70706-stun-meta-needs-to-go/ Uhm..... You always get people moaning about stuff. If you read the post most of the people replying they disagree with the OP. This really doesn't prove anything, having played GW2 myself I can say hard CC isnt a problem in that game. It stagnates meta and restricts build choices. It is the number one leading cause for it. That's all I have argued in this thread. There are proposed solutions for alternatives to one button hard cc in @Dreoh stun thread.
truely wrote: » I'm not saying you can't have skill in creating builds overall. I'm saying you can't have skill in builds that are based on upping %disable modifiers. Also not sure what you mean by stats on armour are not predetermined, armour still has set stats you can't choose whatever you like, obviously different armour offers different stats.
Crafters will be able to assign different skills/abilities and stats on gear.[15][16] Master crafters will be able to influence several (but not all) stats on their crafted items.[15][17]
truely wrote: » JustVine wrote: » truely wrote: » JustVine wrote: » truely wrote: » JustVine wrote: » truely wrote: » Guli wrote: » Good that people have different thoughts on this, we need to figure this out sooner than later. also i thought about it some more, and what if CC has 100% hit rate (if not rolled/shielded etc) but you could modify your gear/use skills that shorten the amount of time you are affected by the CC. I think that's a great solution if the disable% stats affect hard CC length rather than completely nullifying the CC I've only seen this work in fighting game strategy level champion fighters. Ashes is neither a champion fighter nor do people seem to want this to be fighting game level design balance (after all we are talking about ashes having hard cc here which in itself negates two layers of fighting game style strategy.) Name a mmo this solution has ever made stun not a stagnating/build restricting factor in the meta or not a free win. what's your point, that there should be no hard CCs? Pretty sure GW2 has hard CCs and it's not a CC stun lock auto win. https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/topic/70706-stun-meta-needs-to-go/ Uhm..... You always get people moaning about stuff. If you read the post most of the people replying they disagree with the OP. This really doesn't prove anything, having played GW2 myself I can say hard CC isnt a problem in that game. It stagnates meta and restricts build choices. It is the number one leading cause for it. That's all I have argued in this thread. There are proposed solutions for alternatives to one button hard cc in @Dreoh stun thread. you are debating a point which isn't the point of the thread...it's about RnG on hard CC not whether they should exist or not.
