Enigmatic Sage wrote: » Not to sound rude or anything but the RNG blocking dependence comes off as an older and less skillful game mechanic. Remember how in diablo games where you % chance to block on it's RNG variables and your character would just sit there tanking mobs showing the blocking animation repeated ( a bit extreme for an example but relatively similar), it just doesn't fit the modern design of video games in my opinion. Percentile RNG blocking is just wrong for this type of game (again, in my opinion). It's going to cause turmoil between the two types of systems and two types of game style. I personally think it should just be one or the other and unfortunately for tab targeting, it's not RNG percentile stat patting. What's the point of wearing a shield if potentially the only time using in TT is RNG based, feels like a decoration instead of a tool. As much as I have enjoyed TT over the years regardless of RNG percentiles mechanics, when I see AoC, it says it should lean more to the action combat side of things to elevate not only its potential, but the genre's potential as well. But hey, you want RNG blocking, I want active blocking, hopefully having both doesn't damper the games potential. I do agree with what Jahlon said though about the studio coming out and saying which direction they're more leaning towards because creating a dual system for both 50-50 is going to cause a head for everyone involved.
JamesSunderland wrote: » Enigmatic Sage wrote: » Not to sound rude or anything but the RNG blocking dependence comes off as an older and less skillful game mechanic. Remember how in diablo games where you % chance to block on it's RNG variables and your character would just sit there tanking mobs showing the blocking animation repeated ( a bit extreme for an example but relatively similar), it just doesn't fit the modern design of video games in my opinion. Percentile RNG blocking is just wrong for this type of game (again, in my opinion). It's going to cause turmoil between the two types of systems and two types of game style. I personally think it should just be one or the other and unfortunately for tab targeting, it's not RNG percentile stat patting. What's the point of wearing a shield if potentially the only time using in TT is RNG based, feels like a decoration instead of a tool. As much as I have enjoyed TT over the years regardless of RNG percentiles mechanics, when I see AoC, it says it should lean more to the action combat side of things to elevate not only its potential, but the genre's potential as well. But hey, you want RNG blocking, I want active blocking, hopefully having both doesn't damper the games potential. I do agree with what Jahlon said though about the studio coming out and saying which direction they're more leaning towards because creating a dual system for both 50-50 is going to cause a head for everyone involved. Its interesting to see people that considers RNG blocking to be a "less skillful mechanic" just because it is simple a different type of skill required instead of Active Blocking but fail to understand that. Active block is all about previsible reaction, see your enemy wind-up animation for a big attack worth blocking, and boom! skill blocked, nice reactive skill bro. Passive RNG block is all about the the stategy skill of dealing with unpredictability, you don't know if you will block the big attack or not, but you will probably block stuff that might come before that, changing scenarions and therefore making you change plans on the fly, and having options like trying a CC against the big attack or evading with a movement skill. Both skills have value even tho some might value or simple disregard one over the other. As i said in another comment answering another person "Without rng stat checks such as block/parry/evasion to check tab-target skills, it would straight up make it the meta over action skills(unless overly buffed breaking balance) that can be escaped through movement/positioning and requires aiming, this isn't about being "lazy" or "boring".its about core funcionality and balancing." As much as you may want Ashes to heavily lean towards action, it is Hybrid, and therefore requires hybrid mechanics, not action or tab, but both. Having both doesn't "damper the games potential" it makes it reasonable.
Enigmatic Sage wrote: » I wont deny that RNG blocking isn't part of strategy or that RNG plays a role in games like this as I previously mentioned with how base damage range and crit ranges work in my previous posts. I dont think it's lazy coding either I just feel this game would be better with active blocking instead of RNG luck dependence. I'm not belittling game design choices i'm sharing my opinion on the threads topic.
One thing to consider about hybrid is it's a spectrum, not something that is split down the middle always as a 50-50 system. Hybrid has lots of grey zones for its nuance. I do feel though by reading some peoples comments on these forums that they think Hybrid translates to Dual system integration (which to be fair, could be a possibility). One side of the spectrum is the extreme TT, the other as the extreme AC example (black and white). It's going to be a grey game but what shade of grey?
I do appreciate your point of view on it as it's something I have and do consider as well
I just personally think the game is probably going to lean a bit more towards AC than being split down the middle and RNG blocking isn't the best fit for it. Currently, you have 10 ability slots and a left and mouse click (we'll just ignore keybind customisation for now), I just think hitting a button to block regardless of press and hold vs toggle on and off is a much better immersive experience that stat patting for passive RNG block chance.
The game is in development, nothing is guaranteed as things can easily change so the community (including myself) need to keep an open mind to the project we're supporting as we do come from different backgrounds and preferences but as Jahlon said, it's Steven's game, it comes down to what he decides at the end of the day.
JamesSunderland wrote: » Enigmatic Sage wrote: » It is interesting that you believe that "the game is probably going to lean a bit more towards AC" the last stream certainly gave off that impression without context from Alpha 1 as ranged weapons weren't presented but ranged weapons basic attacks worked in Tab target(not requiring active aim just lokking all attacks in the target.). The thing with the active blocking from last stream is that we don't know if the active block will have a duration or cooldown or will simple rely on a resource(like block stamina or something) without know that it is hard to say how the block would work independently or alongside passive RNG block. It's simple impossible for me to disregard passive RNG blocking considering players will be able to have up to 75% tab target skills and tab target Ranged basic attacks(considering Alpha 1).
Enigmatic Sage wrote: »
Enigmatic Sage wrote: » It is just starting to sound as if you think you're better than me (or others) to be honest when you reply with wording like that.
Not to sound rude or anything but the RNG blocking dependence comes off as an older and less skillful game mechanic.
But hey, you want RNG blocking, I want active blocking, hopefully having both doesn't damper the games potential.
Noaani wrote: » Enigmatic Sage wrote: » It is just starting to sound as if you think you're better than me (or others) to be honest when you reply with wording like that. Someone thinking they know more about a very specific and narrow subject does not mean they think they are better than someone else. Do I think I know more about tab target combat design than you? Yes, yes I do. I've talked to a lot of experienced tab target game developers and learned that I know more about it than they do. This isn't an accident or a fluke, I've put more time in to studying MMO combat systems than I put in to my degree. Significantly more - because I enjoy it. Do I think that makes me a better person than anyone else? Nope (if anything, it means I wasted a LOT of time), I have no doubt there are many things you know significantly more about than I ever would. Should we find ourselves ever talking about one such topic, I do hope you will point that out to me. Fact is though, like most things that some players think are pure RNG, %block in most MMORPG's is actually normalized so that the more damage an attack would do, the more likely it is to be blocked. This means that if a massive hit lands on you, 99.99% of the time it is because your gear is not where it should be, or you are not in a tanking spec. Not to sound rude or anything but the RNG blocking dependence comes off as an older and less skillful game mechanic. It's just different gameplay. In a game like this, your characters ability to block an attack in a game like this is a result of your ability to gear that character up, and spec it to block better. I would agree with you if you want to say that this doesn't work in games like WoW, where everyone just gets the game gear and runs the same spec. Totally, 100% agree with you on that. There is literally no skill in that at all. However, in a game where there are multiple viable gear paths, meaning there are multiple viable spec paths, and where things like your own personal reaction time, your connection speed to the server, and even the speed of the computer you are running all have an impact on what is best for you to do, there is no one size fits all for gear or spec, and so it is up to the individual player to work out what they need to do. Getting the right gear and spec that works for you in such games is a skill in and of itself. I expect Ashes to be such a game. A players gear can be considered the sum total of their game play time up to the point they are at. If you have really good gear, it is because you have played really well. If you have really poor gear, it is because you played really poorly. What this means is that passive defenses are literally a result of how well you have played the game up to this point, while active defenses are how well you are playing it right now. But hey, you want RNG blocking, I want active blocking, hopefully having both doesn't damper the games potential. Actually, if I were playing a tank, I would probably go about 50/50 in my scheme from earlier. Perhaps even lean more towards active defense. I would look at mostly active defense and mostly tab attacks as the best way to play a tank. I don't argue these points because it is what I want, I argue them because it is what people expect from Ashes. If a game has a hybrid combat system where players can pick and chose between action and tab (up to that 75/25 split), that whole thing is wasted if they have to always run active defense.
Enigmatic Sage wrote: » LOL that just comes off as arrogant dude but it literally contradicts you as believing you're better than other people.
There's a lot of more potential for tactical gameplay with active blocking.
Noaani wrote: » Enigmatic Sage wrote: » LOL that just comes off as arrogant dude but it literally contradicts you as believing you're better than other people. I'm sure you know this, but I am not overly concerned with how I am perceived by others. There's a lot of more potential for tactical gameplay with active blocking. I agree. Where there is even more tactical gameplay, is where players have the choice of active or passive. It may well be that they want a build that has them having to focus on other things, but they still need an amount of protection. A player can then flip block off to be more passive, and put some of their focus in other areas. Or that same player could leave fully active blocking, where they need to put a good amount of their focus on it - but have other things simplified (perhaps having 5 or 6 attack abilities as opposed to 15 - 10). Keep in mind, I am not saying players should have to use passive defense. I am saying they should be able to use active or passive as they see fit.
Dygz wrote: » Well, it's an RPG. And it's hybrid combat, so... Expect plenty of RNG blocking.
Dygz wrote: » There are exceptions to every rule, sure. That doesn't mean that the exceptions become the rule.
McMackMuck wrote: » Good discussion. Suggestion, give shields: 1) a high percentage damage reduction ("dam red%") 2) a high percentage chance to negate criticals (neg crit%) and some other proc-ed abilities? Being hit repeatedly knocks down the damage reduction / crit negation percentage. Passive blocking - the dam red% / crit neg% recovers slowly over time. - actual damage reduction and crit negation is half the specified value. Active blocking - the dam red% / crit neg% recovers more quickly. - the actual damage reduction and crit negation is the specified value - a small movement speed penalty based on how heavy the shield is, due to the focus on a defensive stance. Medium and Large Shields - block ranged and melee Buckler sized shields - block melee only Give some melee weapons an inferior 'block melee' ability. If you give damage reduction % and crit negation % to shields you should also consider giving them to armor. I'm also in favor of armor having a small movement speed reduction based on its effectiveness as armor (-25% movement for full plate seems a reasonable trade off to me, before we start talking mitigation and exceptions), but I don't think that opinion is shared by everyone.
Enigmatic Sage wrote: » Dygz wrote: » There are exceptions to every rule, sure. That doesn't mean that the exceptions become the rule. and vice versa you can be such be such an odd ball with how black and white you perceive game genre's and systems with your responses like these, lol.
Dygz wrote: » Enigmatic Sage wrote: » Dygz wrote: » There are exceptions to every rule, sure. That doesn't mean that the exceptions become the rule. and vice versa you can be such be such an odd ball with how black and white you perceive game genre's and systems with your responses like these, lol. I mean Jeffrey explicitly stated what I just did. Ashes is an RPG so there will be RNG in combat. Less RNG associated with the Action Combat abilities. Some devs like to make radical changes, sure. Also, I didn't say that a game can't be an RPG if there is no RNG.
