I don't like action combat, and it could very potentially stop me from playing

I haven't played it yet, so I'm not drawing any sort of line yet. But steven asked for feedback about if we are going in a positive direction, and I'm just gonna say that every action combat korean type mmo I've ever played I have absolutely hated. I am tab target 100%, I think action combat only works from an overhead 3rd person perspective like diablo or league of legends or lost ark. I don't want to aim my ability's honestly, If I use a sword and get animation locked, and at the same time I'm required to dodge some kind of skill shot. I'm not gonna be happy. If I miss a spell as a spell caster because my mouse was 4 pixels off, same thing. Tab targeting let's me focus on what I think matters.

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Dygz

And I'm saying that is just one aspect of BDO's poor combat design for an MMORPG.

Azherae

Whew... yeah ok that's enough for today. I thank(?) you for allowing me to probe at your mind yet again.

Noaani

Mag7spy wrote: »

You are so stuck in your mind about defending tab target it is actually insane. I've always known about ability ques not from you telling me.

OK so, two quotes from you.

Mag7spy wrote: »

You could not have said that better, the entire time i look at my ability bar and not anything else its terrible. Part of the reason that it put me to sleep when I use to play City of heroes and SWTOR.

Mag7spy wrote: »

You are right about the sense of time i can't do anything so im looking at the ability bar until my move is up and clicking it the moment its up lmao.

@Mag7spy

Since you didn't say either of these in the context of hyperbole or anything, and were absolutely dead serious, it is blatantly obvious that you did not know about ability queues when you posted these two comments.

Either that, or you were lying.

So, basically, either you were lying then by saying you waited looking at the ability bar for the ability you wanted to use to become available when you knew ability queues were a thing, or you are lying now in saying that you knew about ability queues.

I don't care which one it is, but there is literally no scenario now in which it can't be one of these two.

Regardless of which it is, you are blatantly lying to further your argument against tab targeting. To this, I would say that if you can't make a successful argument against a thing (against ANY thing) without needing to lie, then you probably shouldn't make nay argument against it.

Again when I talk about speed it doesn't need to be sonic but there is a huge difference when you have full control and its your actions that are needed in a fight. Unlike tab target games where you can run in a straights line not look at any of your target and the game does more then half the work for you as all you have to do is be near the mob and press the attack button.

This is also untrue.

I'm going to start off by questioning the part about "it's your actions that are needed in a fight". I mean, this is true for both action and tab - and literally every other game genre out there. Your actions are all you are doing. I assume you mean something else other than what you have said, but since you only said what you said - and what you said applies equally to literally every game ever made - I am unsure what it is you mean.

Now on to the second part here, with melee combat, you have as much of a requirement for positioning as you do in action combat. You need to be up close and directly facing your target.

In terms of ranged, you need to be in range and facing your target still. This is somewhat easier than an action game - but that is the point. In action games, you focus on aiming at the target and using one of your 4 or 5 abilities. In tab games, you aim generally towards the target, and focus on using the correct ability at the correct time out of 20+. You commenting on how easy tab is because of not needing to aim is akin to me commenting on how easy action is because of how few abilities games have.

And before you say "but action combat games *could* have more abilities than they do if a developer wanted", it is equally true that tab target games could require a tighter direction to your target as well. Meaning both could be made more like the other if a developer wanted.

How it looks is important it gives you an idea of what is going on and what characters can do.

This only applies to people watching, not people playing.

Sure you can say maybe you have more reason to move in high end content (akin to the dragon L2 raid boss) though unsure if they have anything akin to aoe things you need to constantly dodge in EQ2. But the majority of content wouldn't be true to that because tab isn't designed for that.

Keep in mind, the argument here is not about all tab vs all action. I've said many, many times that action is better for solo content, small groups and PvP. It is large groups and raids where tab shines. Based on that, you probably shouldn't come in saying the above (which is basically saying what I just said) in defense of your point that action is better with raids.

In regards to EQ2 combat, that video from L2 would be considered a low to mid tier raid in EQ2. There is significantly less going on in it than there is in even some single group encounters. For L2 that's fine, it has a different player base that is more interested in PvP than PvE - but EQ2's player base plays the game literally only for the content, and as such the content is the best of any game I have ever played (a list that is well over 30 MMO's at this point - though many of them were less than a month).

These make the fight look like its almost 20 years dated and people wouldn't see gameplay like that and think this is exciting.

Again what I see is people standing still using their skills

Here's a question for you. If you have a game in which pressing the buttons to use the right skill takes more effort and thought in a tab game than using the right buttons and jumping around in an action game takes, why is it an issue?

This argument again comes down to how tab target LOOKS vs how action combat LOOKS. It has nothing at all to do with how each of them play.

Again, all of your arguments come down to this. You are not talking at all about gameplay, you are talking about how the game looks, as if you are some wannabe streamer that hasn't got the personality to get views based on that.

Noaani

Mag7spy wrote: »

The point of the discussion is there is a higher level that can be achieves through action combat in mmorpgs because the devs have more tools available to them from design perspective and creating a more immersive experience.

And as I have said before - they do not have more tools.

You have yet to give one example of what an action combat game can do with a top end encounter that a tab target game can not do. This is because there literally is nothing one can do that the other can't.

The reason that tab target is better in this content (any content in which players are expected to be 100% engaged) is because the combat system of a tab target game has less of a demand, meaning the developers can put more in to the encounter. In order for action combat games to do that, they either need to go over that 100% engagement (ie, the encounter is impossible - but keep in mind tab target games can do this as well), or they need to remove something from either the combat system (you will get players quit the game) or - and this is the only option left - put less in to the encounter.

I agree with you when you said the discussion has gone a bit off topic, but the above is the core of the discussion you and I are having. You have not provided any reasoning as to why this isn't the case.

I'm not even looking for examples (game developers know game design better than you or I, and as such there are currently literally zero complex action combat encounters in any MMORPG right now). Me asking you for examples would be unfair on you. This is why I am asking you for reasoning and logic - but you seem to have failed to bring that along as well.

So, lets bring it back to the start.

The situation; action and tab can have encounters in which player engagement is over 100%, but both are developed by people that know 100% is the limit.

The games combat systems are designed and set, and can be added to for an encounter, but not subtracted from (as in, you can give players abilities and such that are just for the encounter, but you can not remove any abilities from the combat system).

The mechanics that each game uses can add what ever the developers like, movement, focus, pure DPS checks, pure healer checks, CC, you name it, they can all be added in to both games.

Action combat uses more of that player engagement than tab, meaning tab has more that they can place on the encounter (they can have 15 mechanics on the go where as action can have 5, for example). Action can't have any more than this because that would bring the encounter over 100% engagement, but tab also can't have any more than this because that would bring the encounter over 100% engagement.

So, based on this, tab target game developers can put MORE of these mechanics in to any given encounter, meaning these games have an inherent benefit in terms of encounter variety (this is just basic math).

The above is the logic and outright math you are arguing against.

Feel free to reset your argument and try again if you like.

Noaani

NiKr wrote: »

So what I'm saying with this is - everyone who wants a more tab-leaning game has a god complex and wants to control people. Yep, 100% the case

I'm not even going to argue with this...

Mag7spy

@Mag7spy

Since you didn't say either of these in the context of hyperbole or anything, and were absolutely dead serious, it is blatantly obvious that you did not know about ability queues when you posted these two comments.

Either that, or you were lying.

So, basically, either you were lying then by saying you waited looking at the ability bar for the ability you wanted to use to become available when you knew ability queues were a thing, or you are lying now in saying that you knew about ability queues.

I don't care which one it is, but there is literally no scenario now in which it can't be one of these two.

Regardless of which it is, you are blatantly lying to further your argument against tab targeting. To this, I would say that if you can't make a successful argument against a thing (against ANY thing) without needing to lie, then you probably shouldn't make nay argument against it.

When people try to take wording out of context its kind of sad. The whole point was that I don't need to feel a need to look at the screen most the time or the fact you can paly the game with needing to look at the screen 24/7 and you don't need that much focus. Hence why i would rather look at my skills and use them, which does include me clicking ti head of time if i want and quiet it as I give the screen little focus.

You aren't doing yourselves favors you are just being emotionally charged on points that mean nothing for combat in tab target,. queuing doesn't change the fundamentals of combat. And the reason for you bringing it up held no weight.

Mag7spy

Now on to the second part here, with melee combat, you have as much of a requirement for positioning as you do in action combat. You need to be up close and directly facing your target.

In terms of ranged, you need to be in range and facing your target still. This is somewhat easier than an action game - but that is the point. In action games, you focus on aiming at the target and using one of your 4 or 5 abilities. In tab games, you aim generally towards the target, and focus on using the correct ability at the correct time out of 20+. You commenting on how easy tab is because of not needing to aim is akin to me commenting on how easy action is because of how few abilities games have.

There is a big difference between tab melee combat where the wing is meaningless where as in action when you swing you still need to hit your target.

4 range abilities? This moment makes it sound like you don't have experience playing action combat mmos and trying to boil them down to the few you know about. BDO, tera, elyon, guild wars have more then just 4 abilities. Just because some games choose to not have as much doesn't mean all games only have 4 skills.

Also having 30-40 abilities to use where have them feel exactly the same and do not feel different gameplay wise isn't really a positive.

Mag7spy

That would be because - for the most part - tab target games are all 20 years old (or very close to it).

There hasn't been a proper tab target game released in the last decade (Rift was the last game I consider to be a proper tab target game), because developers have been trying to get action combat to work in various forms since then.

It stands to reason that a modern tab target game will look, well, more modern.

Keep in mind, those tab target games from 20 years ago are still popular enough to be getting regular content updates (the original EQ is about to receive its 22nd expansion later this year - this has to be a record for full expansions for any game genre).

Yup everyone is playing old mmorpgs cause all new ones are full of p2w and no one have been realyl developing anything relevant. Most mmorpgs after Rift (which i played plenty) are moving towards action combat because that is where the genre is evolving to. But her if you love EQ you can always pledge to Pantheon that will focus on pve content.

Here's a question for you. If you have a game in which pressing the buttons to use the right skill takes more effort and thought in a tab game than using the right buttons and jumping around in an action game takes, why is it an issue?

This argument again comes down to how tab target LOOKS vs how action combat LOOKS. It has nothing at all to do with how each of them play.

Again, all of your arguments come down to this. You are not talking at all about gameplay, you are talking about how the game looks, as if you are some wannabe streamer that hasn't got the personality to get views based on that.

I'll keep this one short and sweet it looks different and more engaging because of the gameplay mechanics.
If you give tab target cool fancy great looking animations with a backflip as a dodge skill and in tab target style give it 100% evasion rate. That isn't you dodge a skill that is still you using an ability and my view point is exactly the same. The move is auto hitting you and you are using a skill in response and it has ability stats on it because the tab target move still hits you, your buff just allows you to take no dmg so it isn't actually you dodging the skill.

Action combat for when a skill is moving towards you and you barely dodge the magic effect or sword attack trying to hit you is an actual dodge where the game takes into consideration your location and all effects are not automatically guided to hit you. It is something that just feels better for most people as its more fun to dodge then have a state dodge. That doesn't mean there shouldn't be state dodges, it should be both things together so you have all the great gameplay feeling and the great stats together as one.

Noaani

Mag7spy wrote: »

When people try to take wording out of context its kind of sad.

I didn't take it out of context - you didn't provide any context.

If you do not feel the need to look at your screen, then you are obviously not playing top end content. You absolutely need to not only look at your screen in top end content in tab target games, but you often need to keep a lookout in multiple directions. In fact, this is why the camera direction and character direction (or attack direction) are not tied - you sometimes need to be attacking something in one direction, and keeping a lookout for things in the exact opposite direction.

I mean, I'm not sure what to tell you here. Top end content requires you seeing things that are happening in the game world, because you have to react to them.

Even if you are playing content that doesn't require this, there is literally always the chance of adds that you would need to be aware of (tab target games pack mobs in closer together since there is less movement in combat). If you are not watching the actual game, then you will have trouble even in solo areas (this is even more true in solo areas in which group or raid mobs roam).

With the pace most group content goes by, if you aren't watching your screen, your group will run off without you.

All up, the comment about just looking at your action bar is just lacking foundation - in literally any tab target MMO.

The only time it COULD apply is if a game had action combat content, but a tab target combat system. This is why I am adamant that you have no actual tab target experience - your entire thought process seems to revolve around action combat games.

Even your issue with there being too many AoE's is an action combat issue rather than a tab target issue.

Ludullu

Noaani wrote: »

You have yet to give one example of what an action combat game can do with a top end encounter that a tab target game can not do. This is because there literally is nothing one can do that the other can't.

Angle-based vertical combat system. All abilities have 3 forms "low, mid, high" and your camera angle determines which form of the ability will be used when you press the button. Mobs/bosses can be designed with this in mind, being weak to whichever forms and your positioning relative to said mob/boss will be very important. And your camera control skills, while doing dodges and being aware of shit, would be paramount.

If you try having this kind of mechanic in a tab system, you're either sacrificing your ability pool by 2/3 or you bloat it to 3 times its size and overwhelm the players with form shifting mechanics.

If you have a way to utilize this feature in a tab system w/o those drawbacks, I'd have to think a bit more about other possible specialties of action combat. Though the main one I could come up with so far is verticality gameplay. There's a limit to how high you can comfortably look up with a tab camera, while action camera (the almost 2nd person one) gives you pretty much 180 degree (even a bit more considering the character height) dome of potential targets.

Mag7spy

Noaani wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

When people try to take wording out of context its kind of sad.

I didn't take it out of context - you didn't provide any context.

If you do not feel the need to look at your screen, then you are obviously not playing top end content. You absolutely need to not only look at your screen in top end content in tab target games, but you often need to keep a lookout in multiple directions. In fact, this is why the camera direction and character direction (or attack direction) are not tied - you sometimes need to be attacking something in one direction, and keeping a lookout for things in the exact opposite direction.

I mean, I'm not sure what to tell you here. Top end content requires you seeing things that are happening in the game world, because you have to react to them.

Even if you are playing content that doesn't require this, there is literally always the chance of adds that you would need to be aware of (tab target games pack mobs in closer together since there is less movement in combat). If you are not watching the actual game, then you will have trouble even in solo areas (this is even more true in solo areas in which group or raid mobs roam).

With the pace most group content goes by, if you aren't watching your screen, your group will run off without you.

All up, the comment about just looking at your action bar is just lacking foundation - in literally any tab target MMO.

The only time it COULD apply is if a game had action combat content, but a tab target combat system. This is why I am adamant that you have no actual tab target experience - your entire thought process seems to revolve around action combat games.

Even your issue with there being too many AoE's is an action combat issue rather than a tab target issue.

You assumed something to fit your point, when did I ever say ability ques were not a thing? This is how i felt for the majority of the content in games, rift sure there were parts where you needed to see what is going on but it doesn't compare to the level of focus in action. not only the mech but you need to be makign sure you are on your game with your dps and mobility, spacing and all that, there is no down time ever.

You are still missing the point, if you have like 40+ skills on your bar there is reason for you to be focusing on them, you have global cooldowns as well for a reason. Granted i guess you could prob set 1-20 sets on your keyboard and just be clicking them in order.

You like to do a lot of assuming I see saying i have no tab target experience, this is why conversations like this are annoying. Id rather get back to the point if you saying action combat games can't do large scale, and for you to give examples but you literately refuse to do it, nor on games you play. There is no logic here were we can have a sensible I think this element of action combat or i think it can't do tis because of this. But you are so far up yourself you think if action combat does it that is ia a tab target trait to deflect lmao when that isn't the case lmao

Azherae

There is no Kunoichi. There is only Frog.

Ludullu

Azherae wrote: »

Misattribution!

Lies and slander!

Yeah, I probably missed an inside quote from somewhere, or it might've been an undeleted draft from before. Sometime this forum's quoting system frustrates me. Or maybe I just dunno how to properly use it.

Noaani

NiKr wrote: »

If you try having this kind of mechanic in a tab system, you're either sacrificing your ability pool by 2/3 or you bloat it to 3 times its size and overwhelm the players with form shifting mechanics.

I assume what you are suggesting here is that - for example - a ranger could fire an arrow directly at the target to hit them on the side, or they could volley an arrow up to come down and hit them from the top.

I have seen two systems in tab target games that essentially provide the same basic function. One is having multiple skills with a shared cooldown timer. You cast which ever one of the skills fits your situation right now, and both abilities go on cooldown. You are right that this causes ability bloat, and the only games I have seen them in have had those alternate functions of abilities as options things players could spec in to.

The second one I have seen has abilities have multiple functions, and players determine which function they activate based on pressing a modifier key.

Games like this are limited to perhaps 30 abilities before it comes too much, but games don't generally have more than that anyway.

An argument could be made that neither of these are as fluid as using your camera to determine the version of the ability activated, but both do exist - and I assume this is the essence of the functionality you are talking about.

However, the one advantage the above ways have over having to use your camera is that you can use these abilities on your target, while maintaining a greater situational awareness. In my experience, situational awareness in PvE is far more important in tab target games than in action games - I assume action combat developers don't make this a requirement due to the direction of the camera needing to be on the target.

Note; I am not slamming action combat for this - a games content has to be created to suit the combat system, and if that combat system doesn't give you free reign on your camera while in combat, they can't expect you to keep an eye out in every direction at all times while your camera is fixed. I would slam any game that DID ask this of players. To me, this is just one of those differences between the two - action requires you to remain directly on your target at all times, tab doesn't require that much focus on your target, but does require you to keep a bit more of an eye on your surroundings than action - to me, this aspect balances out just fine (though I have no idea how a hybrid system will do this).

Noaani

NiKr wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

Misattribution!

Lies and slander!

Yeah, I probably missed an inside quote from somewhere, or it might've been an undeleted draft from before. Sometime this forum's quoting system frustrates me. Or maybe I just dunno how to properly use it.

You seem to know how to use it just fine, it is just really easy to miss a the BBCode sometimes. I do it fairly often as well.

Ludullu

Noaani wrote: »

I assume what you are suggesting here is that - for example - a ranger could fire an arrow directly at the target to hit them on the side, or they could volley an arrow up to come down and hit them from the top.

Yeah, those would be the variables on skills with some basic function. And the form of the skill would be based on your crosshair's position in relation to your character's head, which is why I said that it'd be somewhere around the 2nd person camera position.

If you're looking down, the abilities would be red colored (for example), if you're in the mid range of the camera - yellow, aiming up top would be green. This would allow you to just perceive your attack form with peripheral vision instead of glancing at the bar. Obviously with time and practice you'd just know the separation borders by feel.

Noaani wrote: »

I have seen two systems in tab target games that essentially provide the same basic function. One is having multiple skills with a shared cooldown timer. You cast which ever one of the skills fits your situation right now, and both abilities go on cooldown. You are right that this causes ability bloat, and the only games I have seen them in have had those alternate functions of abilities as options things players could spec in to.

The second one I have seen has abilities have multiple functions, and players determine which function they activate based on pressing a modifier key.

Games like this are limited to perhaps 30 abilities before it comes too much, but games don't generally have more than that anyway.

An argument could be made that neither of these are as fluid as using your camera to determine the version of the ability activated, but both do exist - and I assume this is the essence of the functionality you are talking about.

Yeah, but I think you could agree that an action combat game could have those 30+ abilities (say, 10 active ones) w/o it feeling clunky or too much, because your camera control would be at top lvl already (in the context of top end content and all).

And you could then add synergy mechanics, not only through classes, but through directional well-timed attacks. Smth like "the tank makes a low shield bash from the front of the mob, while a warrior does a 2h sword high slash from the back. This makes the mob fall, which increases damage of low attacks and serves as a soft CC". The same could be applied to pvp, though obviously it'd be quite a pain in the ass to design properly.

Noaani wrote: »

However, the one advantage the above ways have over having to use your camera is that you can use these abilities on your target, while maintaining a greater situational awareness. In my experience, situational awareness in PvE is far more important in tab target games than in action games - I assume action combat developers don't make this a requirement due to the direction of the camera needing to be on the target.

Yeah, that will always be the advantage tab games have. Both in gameplay and design of said gameplay. But this is probably the most subjective part of the whole discussion and somewhat relates to my joke of "god complexes". Some people prefer to be completely aware of their surroundings at all times and then require for there to be something to be aware of. While other people prefer to "be in the thick of it" and have a much closer feel to their combat. Both are viable gameplay styles and both have their own design difficulty limits. It's just that I'm not sure if the action side has been pushed to its limits, or at least pushed as much as the tab side has been.

Noaani wrote: »

You seem to know how to use it just fine, it is just really easy to miss a the BBCode sometimes. I do it fairly often as well.

I'm just really used to reddit's quoting where you can just highlight a part of the comment, press "quote" and you'll just quote the highlighted part. That's veeery convenient.

And I see it as quite a hassle to delete autodrafts from the comment window. Sometimes I might type smth up but then decide not to send it, but at that point it would have already got saved as a draft. And even if I delete the text and leave the thread's page open - it still doesn't remove the draft. And if I then refresh the page and want to comment smth new, I have to delete all the old text and write new one. I know this is not that big of a problem, but just a bit of a nuisance for me.

Noaani

NiKr wrote: »

And I see it as quite a hassle to delete autodrafts from the comment window.

I find this a little annoying as well.

There is a way to tidy it up though. At the top of the window there is a Quick Links section on the right. One of the options is "My Drafts". If you start typing a post and decide you don't want to post it, you can delete it from there.

While this is a functionality that exists - I don't use it much myself - it is a little clunky for my use case.

Since I have a habit of using these forums on three devices regularly (and other deceives on occasion), I'll often start a post on one device and then continue it on another.

As such, I apparently have 235 drafts saved right now. A "clear all drafts" button would be helpful there, imo.

Anyways, on to your actual post.

NiKr wrote: »

Yeah, but I think you could agree that an action combat game could have those 30+ abilities (say, 10 active ones) w/o it feeling clunky or too much, because your camera control would be at top lvl already (in the context of top end content and all).

And you could then add synergy mechanics, not only through classes, but through directional well-timed attacks. Smth like "the tank makes a low shield bash from the front of the mob, while a warrior does a 2h sword high slash from the back. This makes the mob fall, which increases damage of low attacks and serves as a soft CC". The same could be applied to pvp, though obviously it'd be quite a pain in the ass to design properly.

Action would definitely do it better than tab in relation to tab using multiple abilities on one cooldown - that is clunky. It works in the situations I've seen it used in, but it wouldn't be a mechanic you would make standard in a combat system.

Using shift to use an alternate ability seems less clunky to me.

I do have a question in relation to how this would work in an action game with encounters on the Z axis (perhaps flying mobs). If you targeted a mob that was above another, how would the system know if you are trying to use your high aimed attack on the ground mob, or a direct attack on the flying mob? This would potentially also be an issue with mobs on a small cliff near each other.

I'm sure there is probably a solution to this, I am just curious as to what it is.

Yeah, that will always be the advantage tab games have. Both in gameplay and design of said gameplay. But this is probably the most subjective part of the whole discussion and somewhat relates to my joke of "god complexes". Some people prefer to be completely aware of their surroundings at all times and then require for there to be something to be aware of. While other people prefer to "be in the thick of it" and have a much closer feel to their combat. Both are viable gameplay styles and both have their own design difficulty limits. It's just that I'm not sure if the action side has been pushed to its limits, or at least pushed as much as the tab side has been.

Yeah, this is why I said I don't consider this an advantage for either tab or action.

To me, action requires a little more focus on the target, tab requires a little more focus on your surroundings. To me, they both actually require about the same amount of over all focus.

My main concern with this is in relation to a hybrid game. Ashes can't really require people to aim their abilities which requires the camera face the target, and also keep a situational awareness that can only achieved by being able to re-orient the camera.

Ludullu

Noaani wrote: »

I do have a question in relation to how this would work in an action game with encounters on the Z axis (perhaps flying mobs). If you targeted a mob that was above another, how would the system know if you are trying to use your high aimed attack on the ground mob, or a direct attack on the flying mob? This would potentially also be an issue with mobs on a small cliff near each other.

I'm sure there is probably a solution to this, I am just curious as to what it is.

I was thinking about having abilities that you can use while jumping and/or synergistic abilities where you might be able to get onto a tank holding his shield and you'd have a higher vantage point. Say, tank could do a low shield defensive skill and you'd do a jump/dash towards that tank and the game would recognize that as a synergistic ability which would trigger an animation of the tank lifting the shield with you on it and holding it for 2-3 secs, where you can use any skill in any form. Of course I dunno whether this kinds of skills are even possible, but we are talking about the best possible representations of system so I think some engine should be able to allow this.

Alternatively you could just design the mobs and the combat around each other. Maybe birds do a swooping attack at which point you gotta time your mid/low form skills to catch them properly (would also be a good skill-tester) or you just add enough high attacks to properly deal with anything that's above your head. Or you be a gigachad dev and just say "get a ranged class into your raid and deal with them".

As for mob over another mob interaction, I'd chuck it under the "design around it or allow jumping attacks". As I imagined this in my head, the abilities were purely character based and not mob-reactive. The alternative approach of "each skill reacts to the part of the mob you're aiming at" could maybe work, but then you'd have problems with hitboxes on smaller creatures and I feel like that's a bit too limiting.

Noaani wrote: »

My main concern with this is in relation to a hybrid game. Ashes can't really require people to aim their abilities which requires the camera face the target, and also keep a situational awareness that can only achieved by being able to re-orient the camera.

I think Genshin dealt well with this issue (I'm sure there's other examples too). It has an 8-directional action combat with a free camera. Steven only showed the action part of basic attacks, but they did mention that the game accounts for your direction. I hope next stream we'll see some basic attacks while in tab mode.

And I think the limit to what Intrepid can ask of players in the hybrid system will be set by the speed of combat they go with and the possible upper limit of aimed action abilities. If there's, say, 15 abilities that I can make "action aimed" and they all cd within one rotation and they are all useful in most encounters - Intrepid can definitely not ask too much in terms of overall awareness. But if there's only 5 of those and they're on some sizable cds and maybe 2 of them are semi-situational - I think player skill can push past that and manage to "aim an ability, switch to tab camera, look around, switch back, aim another ability, rinse repeat... profit".

Solvryn

Action requires target acquisition and tracking as apart of the skill set needed to play it well FYI, it requires more awareness.

falcorpix

Every time I see this tab-target vs action combat discussion, I only see the tab-target crowd presenting arguments that arent true all or arent really cons of action combat at all, but rather pros.

Fundamentally, there is nothing tab-target games can do that action cant do and probably better.
Guess what, if you simply add a target lock key to an action combat game, you have your so loved tab-target game, but will all the intricacies of action combat.
Now try adding free camera to a tab-target game...

Child Item