Selo wrote: » Best way is probaby to use a mixed system. Ive been saying for a LOOONG time on this forum going full action combat is not the best idea. Most people have now played New World and Lost Ark. New World action combat is horrible and thats what scares me in every mmorpg that wants to go action combat. Tab target combat is proven to work and while many players maybe dont love it, not many hate it. Much fewer players can play at a high lvl in an action combat game than in a tab target game, and the last thing you want for an mmorpg is for the game to be to uneven from the top players and the worst. The bigger the gap is, the more players will quit.
Azherae wrote: » "The larger your adventuring party, the less any given player will need to move."
NiKr wrote: » Azherae wrote: » "The larger your adventuring party, the less any given player will need to move." Yep, that was very true in L2. Obviously its pve was super basic already, but if you're in a full party of 9 people(and you usually were), then only 1-2 people would be really active. Bards would be on a timer of their buffs, dps were burst-bois who only attacked at the perfect time, healers barely even healed if the kiters were good and the kiters themselves ran around like crazy and did their best to survive w/o burning healer mana. If you were in smaller groups, everyone would have to work more to optimize farming and mana usage and hp and everything else.
Tyranthraxus wrote: » Yours truly is trying a lot of different MMO's lately, and it's starting to feel pointless to have an Action-style combat system in a real MMORPG. Now, I've tried Lost Ark - which is probably the end-all of Action-style combat systems. I didn't stick with it (80 hours, according to the tracker) because Lost Ark feels like a single-player game. It's almost akin to a 2D-scroller, except you can move in all of the compass directions. The most useful insight it provided is that Action-style combat really isn't very useful against a single opponent, since the game is capable of not registering that you're trying to hit the enemy; it's true usefulness seems to be in fighting against groups of enemies. However, most MMO's will let you tab-target either yourself or a single enemy, and then fire off an AoE ability, in fighting groups. Since enemies in MMO's tend to gather directly around you or bunch up together in small, cloistered groups that you can just AoE, is it really necessary to HAVE Action-style combat in an MMO? Isn't it more of a hack-and-slash game feature? Just started trying Guild Wars 2 - which in previous forums-threads, some people identify as Action-combat, while others identify it as Tab-targeting. I've come to define GW2 as Action-combat, since you don't have to have an enemy targeted to use your combat abilities, and your weapon swings freely - damaging any enemies in your way. I've already tried Lineage 2, since AoC is supposed to take a lot of inspiration from it's systems, and just find it too static/old now to really get into, as a new player. Are there some really good examples of Action-based systems anyone can recommend? I'm not enjoying the feel/gameplay of GW2, atm.
Azherae wrote: » Here are the most important 3, and since they have entirely to do with the psychology of players, you can just dismiss them all as 'traits of people you don't consider important'. 1. Because players adapt and bosses don't, people who lose to bosses feel like they are unraveling a puzzle, and that 'because someone can do it, and it was designed by a person, it must be possible', so they are more willing to keep trying. PvP does not have this property. 2. Because players can look at a situation, know that in order to participate in an enjoyable and successful way in that situation means needing to defeat another player of potentially superior skill and investment, and then choose to avoid that situation. The problem arises when most of the game is 'that situation' for a player. 3. Because players are mostly 'regular human beings' and the 'regular human being' response to 'being defeated by a mob over and over is 'this sucks but I can deal with it on my terms' (see #1 and #2) whereas losing to other players tends to trigger feelings of bullying and social demotion which our species is conditioned to avoid, sometimes at extreme cost.
NishUK wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Here are the most important 3, and since they have entirely to do with the psychology of players, you can just dismiss them all as 'traits of people you don't consider important'. 1. Because players adapt and bosses don't, people who lose to bosses feel like they are unraveling a puzzle, and that 'because someone can do it, and it was designed by a person, it must be possible', so they are more willing to keep trying. PvP does not have this property. 2. Because players can look at a situation, know that in order to participate in an enjoyable and successful way in that situation means needing to defeat another player of potentially superior skill and investment, and then choose to avoid that situation. The problem arises when most of the game is 'that situation' for a player. 3. Because players are mostly 'regular human beings' and the 'regular human being' response to 'being defeated by a mob over and over is 'this sucks but I can deal with it on my terms' (see #1 and #2) whereas losing to other players tends to trigger feelings of bullying and social demotion which our species is conditioned to avoid, sometimes at extreme cost. But you're taking an mmo as a stagnant beast that cannot adapt. I'll bring up the most giant game in the world again, League of Legends, how is it that a PvP game, which is definetly what it is, is so widely enjoyed and goes against the "apparent" human condition of not wanting to get beaten to a pulp and scorn on by their fellow man.LoL is essentially, the quickest and simplest game of a pvp orientated mmorpg that's limited to 10 players (or let's say, a high quality scrap vs "the best players in the 2 best guilds on server"), choose one of many preset characters to represent you, get through the lvling and gearing phase quickly and then while doing so proceed to have scraps eventually leading to epic encounters from 5v5 man pvp which includes a boss called Baron Nashor. Then ofc, after the battle, winners take their rank points and are happy to start another "fresh start server" and the losers are relieved that they can start a "fresh start server" and hope for better fortune next time. If your theory is correct, then LoL shouldn't be popular but as MOBA's and many of the other popular genre's that have online, people like to engage and test their limits with others, then ofc it's up to the game's quality for the majority of a casual audience to decide the entertainment value to keep going. What takes the cake for me though is that the general mind frame of people who've enjoyed PvE/Raid/Dungeon priority mmo's is a very simple one, that PvP doesn't work and only interfere's with my experience. Well for starters, can you truly hand on heart say that those PvE centric mmo's have done any good job in making PvP a rewarding and fun experience for the majority of players? The answer should be something along the lines of "OFC not! The ability to attack players was just added in for the simple reason of taking a grind spot and getting a kill count" . So ofc it's all about domination and bullying, there's nothing that pretty about it but what begs the question is why the hell are you and others flat out trying to take simple PvP and other forms of player v player competition off of the table entirely! It's nothing but selfish and stubborn behaviour at this point...unless of course, imaginations and creativity don't exist to think up of a way to allow a mass audience to welcome player contest, of which I can think up of numerous fun concepts in either an open world or dungeon enviroment.
Sol Raven wrote: » No MMO has been able to satisfy my PvP needs since BNS (Blade & Soul). New World would have, if the rest of the game was playable. No genre has managed to disappoint me more than the modern MMO, but I'm very much so banking on AoC to be the one to hopefully change this trend. When I look at an MMO, or any game for that matter, for it's combat/pvp, I want flashy, high skill ceiling, engaging combat, which most tab target games cannot offer me. Main takeaway is that the combat is high skill and very engaging. You need to know your skillset, your matchups, your timing, and have the ability to read your opponent at the same time to win. You could argue exists in ffxiv/wow, but it just doesn't feel as intense. They feel incredibly slow and boring unlike BNS. In addition, BNS also has a lot of animation canceling, which I love in games and most tab targeting games have little to none of. You can know your combos, but if you cant pull them off, let alone vs a good player, then you'll get rolled. Some may argue to look into arena fighter style games such as MortalKombat or Street Figher, however, I need open world group combat and an objective. I need engagement that arena fighters don't offer. Other games don't offer what an MMO with PvP offers. The experience isn't the same The combat isn't as engaging There are little ways of working towards a goal Or to clarify, little goals to work towards I want to, for a few examples: -Be running towards my guilds territory to check on our caravan and get ambushed by an enemy guild fighting to steal our resources -Farm for resources to support my guild mates and find someone farming the same area, only to engage them in combat that was not orchestrated in any way -Set up a gank squad and hunt enemies scouting for potential areas to set up farms/control zones -Have massive, epic battles in beautiful areas with variables to change up the experience and overall feel -Have a structured, organized unit that works together even through extremely difficult situations to come out on top or find ways to make something work that would seem nigh impossible All while fighting with a combat system that tests your skill and ability to perform in these situations further than just knowing what's about to get off cooldown and your extremely basic rotations.
Sol Raven wrote: » Another point of contention for me with tab targetting only games, is it's accuracy and general quickness/ability to respond to multiple engagements. Skill shots and action combat allow players to utilize their expertise and skillset to their full ability, while tab targetting is not only generally slower due to global cooldown timers for your skills, but slower because you have to tab to your target before you can really even do anything meaningful to who you want to focus on, especially in larger numbers or as a ranged dps/support class. These types of games usually devolve into people targetting only the frontline dps and attemping to circle around each other until someone can land a meaningful gank without getting shafted. It's extremely predictable and uninteresting.
NiKr wrote: » Sol Raven wrote: » No MMO has been able to satisfy my PvP needs since BNS (Blade & Soul). New World would have, if the rest of the game was playable. No genre has managed to disappoint me more than the modern MMO, but I'm very much so banking on AoC to be the one to hopefully change this trend. When I look at an MMO, or any game for that matter, for it's combat/pvp, I want flashy, high skill ceiling, engaging combat, which most tab target games cannot offer me. Main takeaway is that the combat is high skill and very engaging. You need to know your skillset, your matchups, your timing, and have the ability to read your opponent at the same time to win. You could argue exists in ffxiv/wow, but it just doesn't feel as intense. They feel incredibly slow and boring unlike BNS. In addition, BNS also has a lot of animation canceling, which I love in games and most tab targeting games have little to none of. You can know your combos, but if you cant pull them off, let alone vs a good player, then you'll get rolled. Some may argue to look into arena fighter style games such as MortalKombat or Street Figher, however, I need open world group combat and an objective. I need engagement that arena fighters don't offer. Other games don't offer what an MMO with PvP offers. The experience isn't the same The combat isn't as engaging There are little ways of working towards a goal Or to clarify, little goals to work towards I want to, for a few examples: -Be running towards my guilds territory to check on our caravan and get ambushed by an enemy guild fighting to steal our resources -Farm for resources to support my guild mates and find someone farming the same area, only to engage them in combat that was not orchestrated in any way -Set up a gank squad and hunt enemies scouting for potential areas to set up farms/control zones -Have massive, epic battles in beautiful areas with variables to change up the experience and overall feel -Have a structured, organized unit that works together even through extremely difficult situations to come out on top or find ways to make something work that would seem nigh impossible All while fighting with a combat system that tests your skill and ability to perform in these situations further than just knowing what's about to get off cooldown and your extremely basic rotations. You have just described L2 pvp. L2 didn't have a gcd. Skill cast times were atk/cast-speed-based so at higher lvls you'd be shooting off dozens of high impact skills a minute. 90% of your gameplay would be in a constant party of the same people that you spent weeks/months/years with. Any and all pve would usually lead to a pvp fight with another constant party that's been together for a while and know how to play with each other best. You could stop your cast at any time, exactly because your skills were animation/cast-based. Time to kill was also really short at top lvls, because you'd have a ton of buffs on you (because of your party)which would give you really high dps. And this led to a constant pressure of "be ready to fight back at any time, because if you don't - you're dead". Sol Raven wrote: » Another point of contention for me with tab targetting only games, is it's accuracy and general quickness/ability to respond to multiple engagements. Skill shots and action combat allow players to utilize their expertise and skillset to their full ability, while tab targetting is not only generally slower due to global cooldown timers for your skills, but slower because you have to tab to your target before you can really even do anything meaningful to who you want to focus on, especially in larger numbers or as a ranged dps/support class. These types of games usually devolve into people targetting only the frontline dps and attemping to circle around each other until someone can land a meaningful gank without getting shafted. It's extremely predictable and uninteresting. This is a bit confusing to me because how exactly could you not target someone deep within a group of people in a tab system? If anything, I'd imagine that it's the action bois who'd have to attack frontline because they literally cannot hit anyone behind those lines. In L2 we'd use rangers/mages to snipe healers at the back, while melee classes would clash in the middle. Or if you were in a dagger party, you'd have support classes agro/attack the frontline of the enemy, while daggers ran through/around to pick off people at the back. And once a "Shadow Step" ability was added (it blinked daggers behind their target's back), you'd have daggers attack those back lines directly exactly because it was a tab target game. We also had blinks for mages that allowed them to move around the battlefield, which made melees' life harder. But from all the action games I've seen, you just pile on in the middle, while ranged classes just shoot whoever's closest to them in that pile, because they can't hit over the pile (unless there's some height difference in the terrain). I've played a bit of B&S, but never got to arena fights so don't really know how difficult its pvp was, but I definitely liked its combo system. Dunno if that would work in Ashes though. But I do think that L2's overall gameplay situation would probably be close to what we'll see in Ashes, which is exactly why I'm interested in the game in the first place.
Sol Raven wrote: » NiKr wrote: » Sol Raven wrote: » No MMO has been able to satisfy my PvP needs since BNS (Blade & Soul). New World would have, if the rest of the game was playable. No genre has managed to disappoint me more than the modern MMO, but I'm very much so banking on AoC to be the one to hopefully change this trend. When I look at an MMO, or any game for that matter, for it's combat/pvp, I want flashy, high skill ceiling, engaging combat, which most tab target games cannot offer me. Main takeaway is that the combat is high skill and very engaging. You need to know your skillset, your matchups, your timing, and have the ability to read your opponent at the same time to win. You could argue exists in ffxiv/wow, but it just doesn't feel as intense. They feel incredibly slow and boring unlike BNS. In addition, BNS also has a lot of animation canceling, which I love in games and most tab targeting games have little to none of. You can know your combos, but if you cant pull them off, let alone vs a good player, then you'll get rolled. Some may argue to look into arena fighter style games such as MortalKombat or Street Figher, however, I need open world group combat and an objective. I need engagement that arena fighters don't offer. Other games don't offer what an MMO with PvP offers. The experience isn't the same The combat isn't as engaging There are little ways of working towards a goal Or to clarify, little goals to work towards I want to, for a few examples: -Be running towards my guilds territory to check on our caravan and get ambushed by an enemy guild fighting to steal our resources -Farm for resources to support my guild mates and find someone farming the same area, only to engage them in combat that was not orchestrated in any way -Set up a gank squad and hunt enemies scouting for potential areas to set up farms/control zones -Have massive, epic battles in beautiful areas with variables to change up the experience and overall feel -Have a structured, organized unit that works together even through extremely difficult situations to come out on top or find ways to make something work that would seem nigh impossible All while fighting with a combat system that tests your skill and ability to perform in these situations further than just knowing what's about to get off cooldown and your extremely basic rotations. You have just described L2 pvp. L2 didn't have a gcd. Skill cast times were atk/cast-speed-based so at higher lvls you'd be shooting off dozens of high impact skills a minute. 90% of your gameplay would be in a constant party of the same people that you spent weeks/months/years with. Any and all pve would usually lead to a pvp fight with another constant party that's been together for a while and know how to play with each other best. You could stop your cast at any time, exactly because your skills were animation/cast-based. Time to kill was also really short at top lvls, because you'd have a ton of buffs on you (because of your party)which would give you really high dps. And this led to a constant pressure of "be ready to fight back at any time, because if you don't - you're dead". Sol Raven wrote: » Another point of contention for me with tab targetting only games, is it's accuracy and general quickness/ability to respond to multiple engagements. Skill shots and action combat allow players to utilize their expertise and skillset to their full ability, while tab targetting is not only generally slower due to global cooldown timers for your skills, but slower because you have to tab to your target before you can really even do anything meaningful to who you want to focus on, especially in larger numbers or as a ranged dps/support class. These types of games usually devolve into people targetting only the frontline dps and attemping to circle around each other until someone can land a meaningful gank without getting shafted. It's extremely predictable and uninteresting. This is a bit confusing to me because how exactly could you not target someone deep within a group of people in a tab system? If anything, I'd imagine that it's the action bois who'd have to attack frontline because they literally cannot hit anyone behind those lines. In L2 we'd use rangers/mages to snipe healers at the back, while melee classes would clash in the middle. Or if you were in a dagger party, you'd have support classes agro/attack the frontline of the enemy, while daggers ran through/around to pick off people at the back. And once a "Shadow Step" ability was added (it blinked daggers behind their target's back), you'd have daggers attack those back lines directly exactly because it was a tab target game. We also had blinks for mages that allowed them to move around the battlefield, which made melees' life harder. But from all the action games I've seen, you just pile on in the middle, while ranged classes just shoot whoever's closest to them in that pile, because they can't hit over the pile (unless there's some height difference in the terrain). I've played a bit of B&S, but never got to arena fights so don't really know how difficult its pvp was, but I definitely liked its combo system. Dunno if that would work in Ashes though. But I do think that L2's overall gameplay situation would probably be close to what we'll see in Ashes, which is exactly why I'm interested in the game in the first place. Perhaps my judgement and experience is a bit dated, as it's been quite some time since I've been end game in a tab target MMO, so these systems have probably improved. However, I still stand by my point of these games not being as intense or engaging. I'm used to every engagement being on drugs due to BNS, where I see high level gameplay of tab target MMOs and it generally lacks the excitement of games like BNS. Most of my love for BNS PvP comes from the combo system and overall fluidity/ability to change things up on the fly.
Sol Raven wrote: » Edit: I'd also like to point out that you are not just spamming abilities or basic rotations in BNS. Everything matters if you're fighting at an equal or higher skill/gear level. As far as hitting targets in groups not directly in front of you, this is the part where I argue this is an aspect of realism I enjoy. If you can aim at the target and manage to hit them (or use a piercing/AOE attack) then you're good, where as if you have no direct LOS on a target then you either prioritize another one for the time being or work to get that LOS. IMO you shouldn't be able to tab target someone in a group and consistently have your basic attacks like arrows just fly through the frontline without colliding with them. This also adds a bit of value, no matter how small or large in your eyes, to the frontline tanks/supports. I don't agree with being able to consistently ignore a target to hit someone behind them without the use of specific skills, which I've seen in some tab target games.
NiKr wrote: » Sol Raven wrote: » Edit: I'd also like to point out that you are not just spamming abilities or basic rotations in BNS. Everything matters if you're fighting at an equal or higher skill/gear level. As far as hitting targets in groups not directly in front of you, this is the part where I argue this is an aspect of realism I enjoy. If you can aim at the target and manage to hit them (or use a piercing/AOE attack) then you're good, where as if you have no direct LOS on a target then you either prioritize another one for the time being or work to get that LOS. IMO you shouldn't be able to tab target someone in a group and consistently have your basic attacks like arrows just fly through the frontline without colliding with them. This also adds a bit of value, no matter how small or large in your eyes, to the frontline tanks/supports. I don't agree with being able to consistently ignore a target to hit someone behind them without the use of specific skills, which I've seen in some tab target games. I mean, yeah, I agree, I just found it weird that you pointed out "only attacking frontlines and running around" as a downside of the tab system, when it's one of the main downsides in an action one. Also, I forget, did B&S have massive pvp? I usually saw 1v1 arena or maaaybe small group vs small group during faction quests. I totally support B&S' combat system, but I'm not sure if it would work well in the context of hundreds vs hundreds, where you can't really do your full cool combos when there's like 10 other people trying to kill you.
Sol Raven wrote: » It wasn't really massive in too many areas, but before the game lost it's PvP crowd, there were a few areas where you'd see 50 - 100 players. Misty Woods, SSP, The Cinderlands, Moonwater Plains, and the Viridian Coast to name a few. Mostly faction areas with things to fight over Faction vs Faction. As time went on, these areas because EXTREMELY outdated, with the devs refusing to add any relevancy to them. I was massively into open world pvp. I was in Laughing Coffin for a bit, fighting The Bloodmoon Gang and other known open world pvp factions. When these areas died in terms of group fights, I still ganked people from the faction on the server that took over, the Cerulean Order, after I swapped my Destroyer to the Crimson Legion. I also played a lot of 6v6, eventually finishing top 30 a few separate occasions before the PvP died off in battleground as well. While it definitely lacked "massive" battles for the most part, there was enough of it, along with the BEST combat system I have ever had the pleasure of enjoying, that I could still play the game for many hours without boredom.
Azherae wrote: Heavy Action style combat has too many performance flaws and too high a learning curve while not mechanically adding much that is useful to the Genre, imo. BDO fits in here.
Tyranthraxus wrote: » Azherae wrote: Heavy Action style combat has too many performance flaws and too high a learning curve while not mechanically adding much that is useful to the Genre, imo. BDO fits in here. This is a good summation of what yours truly is beginning to experience, in specifically exploring games that feature Action-based combat. All personal efforts have been made in not pre-determining a bias in favoring Action or Tab-combat over the other - but thus far? The experience of trying the different games that I've been in the last couple of months has begun to reinforce the initial suspicion that Tab > Action, for MMORPG's. Neverwinter has been fun the last few days - the Fighter has been a really great starting class for exploring the game's Action-based combat system. However.... As well as it works, there? It doesn't feel like a system I'd want repeated in AoC. Even having followed the development of AoC as deeply as I have the last year-and-a-half+, it's hard to gauge where the dev-team is on the to-be final product of the game's combat system. If it were me? I'd scrap any concerns about Action-combat or a "hybrid-system" and just flesh the game out to be Tab-target, with the occasional ability being Action or "free-targeting", in it's execution.
NiKr wrote: » Sol Raven wrote: » It wasn't really massive in too many areas, but before the game lost it's PvP crowd, there were a few areas where you'd see 50 - 100 players. Misty Woods, SSP, The Cinderlands, Moonwater Plains, and the Viridian Coast to name a few. Mostly faction areas with things to fight over Faction vs Faction. As time went on, these areas because EXTREMELY outdated, with the devs refusing to add any relevancy to them. I was massively into open world pvp. I was in Laughing Coffin for a bit, fighting The Bloodmoon Gang and other known open world pvp factions. When these areas died in terms of group fights, I still ganked people from the faction on the server that took over, the Cerulean Order, after I swapped my Destroyer to the Crimson Legion. I also played a lot of 6v6, eventually finishing top 30 a few separate occasions before the PvP died off in battleground as well. While it definitely lacked "massive" battles for the most part, there was enough of it, along with the BEST combat system I have ever had the pleasure of enjoying, that I could still play the game for many hours without boredom. Are there any videos of the bigger pvps that you know? I tried googling "B&S mass pvp", but the top results just gave me arena stuff and a few videos of "guides to pvp" w/o any real big fights. I'm just curious to see how the combat worked in a proper big fight and not in a 1v5 or 1v1 situation.
Sol Raven wrote: » NiKr wrote: » Sol Raven wrote: » It wasn't really massive in too many areas, but before the game lost it's PvP crowd, there were a few areas where you'd see 50 - 100 players. Misty Woods, SSP, The Cinderlands, Moonwater Plains, and the Viridian Coast to name a few. Mostly faction areas with things to fight over Faction vs Faction. As time went on, these areas because EXTREMELY outdated, with the devs refusing to add any relevancy to them. I was massively into open world pvp. I was in Laughing Coffin for a bit, fighting The Bloodmoon Gang and other known open world pvp factions. When these areas died in terms of group fights, I still ganked people from the faction on the server that took over, the Cerulean Order, after I swapped my Destroyer to the Crimson Legion. I also played a lot of 6v6, eventually finishing top 30 a few separate occasions before the PvP died off in battleground as well. While it definitely lacked "massive" battles for the most part, there was enough of it, along with the BEST combat system I have ever had the pleasure of enjoying, that I could still play the game for many hours without boredom. Are there any videos of the bigger pvps that you know? I tried googling "B&S mass pvp", but the top results just gave me arena stuff and a few videos of "guides to pvp" w/o any real big fights. I'm just curious to see how the combat worked in a proper big fight and not in a 1v5 or 1v1 situation. Most of it seems to not have been well documented on YouTube. I do have several gank/grief videos that I showed friends, but most of my Shadowplayed footage of larger fights has been deleted or not transferred from my old hard drive. What I do have is pretty uninteresting and short, and shows practically nothing of value due to my gear difference at the time.https://youtube.com/watch?v=8nMH5G9tNY8
Sol Raven wrote: » Most of those games end up losing their PvE population regardless, only for them to return to their RP games, like FFXIV or WoW.
Azherae wrote: » Sol Raven wrote: » NiKr wrote: » Sol Raven wrote: » It wasn't really massive in too many areas, but before the game lost it's PvP crowd, there were a few areas where you'd see 50 - 100 players. Misty Woods, SSP, The Cinderlands, Moonwater Plains, and the Viridian Coast to name a few. Mostly faction areas with things to fight over Faction vs Faction. As time went on, these areas because EXTREMELY outdated, with the devs refusing to add any relevancy to them. I was massively into open world pvp. I was in Laughing Coffin for a bit, fighting The Bloodmoon Gang and other known open world pvp factions. When these areas died in terms of group fights, I still ganked people from the faction on the server that took over, the Cerulean Order, after I swapped my Destroyer to the Crimson Legion. I also played a lot of 6v6, eventually finishing top 30 a few separate occasions before the PvP died off in battleground as well. While it definitely lacked "massive" battles for the most part, there was enough of it, along with the BEST combat system I have ever had the pleasure of enjoying, that I could still play the game for many hours without boredom. Are there any videos of the bigger pvps that you know? I tried googling "B&S mass pvp", but the top results just gave me arena stuff and a few videos of "guides to pvp" w/o any real big fights. I'm just curious to see how the combat worked in a proper big fight and not in a 1v5 or 1v1 situation. Most of it seems to not have been well documented on YouTube. I do have several gank/grief videos that I showed friends, but most of my Shadowplayed footage of larger fights has been deleted or not transferred from my old hard drive. What I do have is pretty uninteresting and short, and shows practically nothing of value due to my gear difference at the time.https://youtube.com/watch?v=8nMH5G9tNY8 Man, I am reminded how much I hate 5-digit damage in games. BNS might as well stand for Big Number Syndrome. (Ashes starts low and might stay lowish, but I'm not counting on it).
