What is not clear about this post with what I'm saying.
No one wants to play a game having their camera spun around every second from aoes taunts everywhere. If you are one of the few that are fine having someone affect you camera direction every second do not assume that is the majority
The part that isn't clear is that you are saying no one wants a thing that no one has said could happen.
Let's imagine that taunts are added to the game where the taunt value of the ability dictates the duration of the forced target in PvP. If you are taunted, you can't then be taunted by another tank. If that taunt wears off, you would gain an immunity to taunt for at least a few seconds.
In reality, this means you are not going to be taunted more than once every 8 - 10 seconds or so - and that is the actual worst case scenario.
The problem is, you are too busy yelling and screaming (in text form) actual nonsense that makes no sense (hense nonsense). When you are doing this, people can't get to the root of the misunderstanding that you have made (which is the case literally every time), because you are too busy screaming that we aren't listening to you.
Why would I clarify when you aren't even reading the post in the first place?
I've told you I'm not skimming when I'm quoting. Or are you not doing basic reading now as you quote?
Yeah, but that was a lie.
I mean, even if it wasn't, ideas are not contained wihtin one post most of the time. You may skim read a few things then get to one post that you want to reply to.Even if you did read that entire post, you aren't reading the entire conversation.
As such, you are not informing yourself before you speak.
if you arent reading the whole discussion, you can't demand others inform you of the things you have missed - that is assuming you are even capable of articulating which aspects you need clarification on (I've yet to see this - you just start yelling).
Why would I clarify when you aren't even reading the post in the first place?
I've told you I'm not skimming when I'm quoting. Or are you not doing basic reading now as you quote?
Yeah, but that was a lie.
I mean, even if it wasn't, ideas are not contained wihtin one post most of the time. You may skim read a few things then get to one post that you want to reply to.Even if you did read that entire post, you aren't reading the entire conversation.
As such, you are not informing yourself before you speak.
if you arent reading the whole discussion, you can't demand others inform you of the things you have missed - that is assuming you are even capable of articulating which aspects you need clarification on (I've yet to see this - you just start yelling).
Imagine jumping on here to try to argue what someone is thinking and keep doing it to derail a thread.
The only lie here is you trying to force your thinking on someone else and try hard to put words in some ones mouth.
No one needs to read a whole discussion to have their own view point, the moment you decided to quote me we are talking about the camera being forcefully not other points in the thread as was the disccusion that was brought up in your reply.
If you want to talk about the rest of the thread do it with the others that are talking about it, if you are going to quote me on a certain point with what I'm talking about, expect that to be the conversation not the rest of the thread.
All you needed to do was stick to talking about camera and me being against anything that can affect it in a strong negative way in terms of action camera.
Why is it so hard for you to understand, i thought you were more capable than that...
No one needs to read a whole discussion to have their own view point
Indeed - if you are happy having an uninformed opinion on the matter, sure.
The thing is, if you aren't going out of your way to inform your own opinion, you shouldn't really argue that opinion against people that have gone out of their way to inform themselves.
If you are entering a debate with an uninformed opinion and others in said debate have an informed opinion, you should be taking part in that debate with the actual expectation that your opinion will be changed. In fact, that is the only reason you should enter such a debate - in order to have your uninformed opinion challenged.
Some people here think that I do exactly what I said not to do above. Thing is, I dont enter debates (or even discussions, really) unless I am already somewhat informed on the topic. Additionally, if I am going to debate a topic, I commit to learning more about it.
An example of each over the last few years have been the fact that I initially hated the idea of PvE cage fights. NiKr was the person that first told me about them, and at first I thought they sounded stupid. However, I listened to what he had to say about them, questioned him on a few things, and now I think they would be a great addition to any MMO with open world PvP and PvE together.
In terms of committing to learning, ever since I started debating the merits of solid PvE within a game like Ashes, I've committed myself to learning more about L2 specifically (and a little more about BDO as well), since they are games that often come up.
While I wouldnt say I am an expert on either (I know more about BDO thiugh, as I played it for a good while), I at least went out and learned about it so I am at least a little informed when debating or discussing.
All you needed to do was stick to talking about camera and me being against anything that can affect it in a strong negative way in terms of action camera.
I mean, I'd love to, but you need to do the same.
What you have done in this thread is stated your stance, but then refused to clarify anything at all about it. I mean, we get it, you are against the idea, you think its clunky and you dont want to have tour camera spin every second. Cool, that much is clear.
What you havent done is explained why you think any of the above.
I mean, as I pointed out in an above post, the absolute worst case scenario is that you would be taunted once every 8 - 10 seconds - but that is assuming you are in a bad situation and are not trying to get yourself out of it.
You've not bothered to comment on that at all - choosing instead to accuse me of derailing the thread, despite me having just handed you a blatantly clear means by which to further the discussion.
I'm waiting for you to say "I didnt see that post" because or course you didnt, you don't think you need to read in order to participate in a forum discussion.
No one needs to read a whole discussion to have their own view point
Indeed - if you are happy having an uninformed opinion on the matter, sure.
The thing is, if you aren't going out of your way to inform your own opinion, you shouldn't really argue that opinion against people that have gone out of their way to inform themselves.
If you are entering a debate with an uninformed opinion and others in said debate have an informed opinion, you should be taking part in that debate with the actual expectation that your opinion will be changed. In fact, that is the only reason you should enter such a debate - in order to have your uninformed opinion challenged.
Some people here think that I do exactly what I said not to do above. Thing is, I dont enter debates (or even discussions, really) unless I am already somewhat informed on the topic. Additionally, if I am going to debate a topic, I commit to learning more about it.
An example of each over the last few years have been the fact that I initially hated the idea of PvE cage fights. NiKr was the person that first told me about them, and at first I thought they sounded stupid. However, I listened to what he had to say about them, questioned him on a few things, and now I think they would be a great addition to any MMO with open world PvP and PvE together.
In terms of committing to learning, ever since I started debating the merits of solid PvE within a game like Ashes, I've committed myself to learning more about L2 specifically (and a little more about BDO as well), since they are games that often come up.
While I wouldnt say I am an expert on either (I know more about BDO thiugh, as I played it for a good while), I at least went out and learned about it so I am at least a little informed when debating or discussing.
All you needed to do was stick to talking about camera and me being against anything that can affect it in a strong negative way in terms of action camera.
I mean, I'd love to, but you need to do the same.
What you have done in this thread is stated your stance, but then refused to clarify anything at all about it. I mean, we get it, you are against the idea, you think its clunky and you dont want to have tour camera spin every second. Cool, that much is clear.
What you havent done is explained why you think any of the above.
I mean, as I pointed out in an above post, the absolute worst case scenario is that you would be taunted once every 8 - 10 seconds - but that is assuming you are in a bad situation and are not trying to get yourself out of it.
You've not bothered to comment on that at all - choosing instead to accuse me of derailing the thread, despite me having just handed you a blatantly clear means by which to further the discussion.
I'm waiting for you to say "I didnt see that post" because or course you didnt, you don't think you need to read in order to participate in a forum discussion.
I think you really need to go back over your post that started this conversation and really take a second look at what you are saying. You disregard my post as a bad take when i outline cam being moved around is clunky in effects and disorientating in combat when you have wars with a crap ton of people around.
Instead of talking about the exact points u change the entire direction of the conversation the devs are going to do it right and not put broken things in the game. "I agree devs will do a good job and your idea is very consumer based and devs would not implement something that would make action based camera worse.
This has nothing to do with being uninformed you are straight up just being ignorant and disregarding concerns and not attempting to understand the concern. Or talk about how a feature like that would not be a issue. Instead you beat around the bush saying things that don't get us anywhere and the most obvious things. Another example "CC is a bad thing if it is done in excess" everyone is aware of that and it doesn't change the experience being ruined losing control of your camera....
If you want more exact details on my train of thought, instead of arguing, being passive aggressive, putting words in my mouth ask on the exact certain points with questions so you can be better informed and lead to a proper discussion. You are the one quoting, not the other way around that started this.
. You disregard my post as a bad take when i outline cam being moved around is clunky in effects and disorientating in combat when you have wars with a crap ton of people around.
How many people are around has no impact at all on this discussion.
How often you can be taunted however, does.
If you can only be taunted once every 10 seconds or so, why would it matter if there is only one other person around or 100 other people around?
Now, if you think it does indeed matter, you need to explain why you think it matters.
This has nothing to do with being uninformed you are straight up just being ignorant and disregarding concerns and not attempting to understand the concern
In order for me to be able to disregard your concerns, you would first need to communicate what they actually are.
So far, you havent done that. The above portion of this post is my THIRD attempt to get you to move this conversation on by explaining why you think the above is an issue.
The way you have worded your objections makes it seem like players would be able to bounce a rivals camera around essentially at will - yet that would clearly not be possible. However, rather than assuming you think that, I have been trying to get you to clear it up
In terms of putting words in people mouths, you are the one that rewrote a point that I made, altering words key to portraying the meaning and then demanded I answer yes or no to your rewrite. That is putting words in someones mouth.
What I am doing is simply pointing out where there may be a disconnect, and asking you to explain what you mean, using as many or as few of your own words as you like.
Literally the opposite of putting words in your mouth - I am trying to get you to speak for yourself.
Tanks should fill a variety of roles in pvp while still having the minimum viably necessary tools for pve;. I'd like to see different tank specs have the ability too initiate fights, mitigate damage, setup cc for kills, group utility like aoe run speed increase, physical battle field control, counter initiation, damage reflection/punishment, etc. Each of these can take many forms and doesn't necessarily mean you character has the classic high armor/high health pool/low move speed of yesteryears tanks.
Ashes should think about how fights evolve and what the specific roles in those fights look like as the fights themselves shift.
. You disregard my post as a bad take when i outline cam being moved around is clunky in effects and disorientating in combat when you have wars with a crap ton of people around.
How many people are around has no impact at all on this discussion.
How often you can be taunted however, does.
If you can only be taunted once every 10 seconds or so, why would it matter if there is only one other person around or 100 other people around?
Now, if you think it does indeed matter, you need to explain why you think it matters.
This has nothing to do with being uninformed you are straight up just being ignorant and disregarding concerns and not attempting to understand the concern
In order for me to be able to disregard your concerns, you would first need to communicate what they actually are.
So far, you havent done that. The above portion of this post is my THIRD attempt to get you to move this conversation on by explaining why you think the above is an issue.
The way you have worded your objections makes it seem like players would be able to bounce a rivals camera around essentially at will - yet that would clearly not be possible. However, rather than assuming you think that, I have been trying to get you to clear it up
In terms of putting words in people mouths, you are the one that rewrote a point that I made, altering words key to portraying the meaning and then demanded I answer yes or no to your rewrite. That is putting words in someones mouth.
What I am doing is simply pointing out where there may be a disconnect, and asking you to explain what you mean, using as many or as few of your own words as you like.
Literally the opposite of putting words in your mouth - I am trying to get you to speak for yourself.
The more people around the more that can cycle the taunt, to want a taunt to work the same as PvE you have going to have target and aoe taunts. The more people that have skills like that more the often you will be taunted off the protection and more people it will affect in larger wars.
We don't know the balance they are going for with cc protection so the protection could be less that 10 seconds, i view it at being around 5 seconds since 10 seems pretty long to not b cc'd base on having limited amount of skills and the game will have a faster pace so more cc will be needed. But still something we will have to see later on but 10 secs seems like you are trying to stretch it pretty far and doesn't seem realistic.
So again the more people around the more will have their taunts off cooldown and more quickly catch you off your protect timer. As well as be able to taunt more people I'm unsure why you don't see this connection.
I have said this atleast 5 times already but ill repeat again.... if the game is a bit faster pace and you are trying to keep track of a lot of things and focus on combat. Physically having something move your camera suddenly in the middle of the fight and lose control of it adds immensely clunky gameplay. That is one of the worse feelings you can have, sometimes games have it sprinkled in, the only notable one I can think of is smite. Though that kind of thing isn't being spammed on you nor in ever single game as only a few character have it again. In a mmorpg where their are tanks everywhere it is going to be a bad feeling of life dealing with a lack of control at times that will throw people off and make gameplay feel not good.
I'm going to ignore the bottom part of the post so we can just focus on actual meaningful discussion around the taunt and why I feel that does not work with action camera in making things feel bad.
The moment this taunt does not affect or move your camera i have 0 issues.
But the distinction between a Tank and a 'Fighter' is specifically that the Tank is built to take hits and damage. That's what I am talking about in general.
You can absolutely always build a Tank to be a 'CC and debuff menace'. The problem is that you then don't need to make a Tank, you could make a Fighter that does this, and honestly most players would be happier. Nor will the person who tanks in PvE by drawing the attention of the mob and taking hits, actually do any of that.
You don't need to hit the Tank because they're a menace, unless they are the biggest menace. If they are the biggest menace then what you need is more Tanks.
If you have some reason/method to counter the menace of 'Many tanks' we'll be back in the loop. This is precisely the problem that MOBAs have been working on for years. There's nothing 'ineffective' about what you're suggesting, it's that the gameplay doesn't actually work out this way.
Honestly I feel this is half the reason we got all that homogenization in games and discarding the Trinity in class design to begin with. MOBA Tank design is almost nothing like this, it goes right back to the 'Let's make CC Bruisers and call them Tanks', and it's only recently that most games built any true Tanks (again, from the Perspective that you actually need to kill them instead of just treating them as another source of CC that you really need to avoid).
Again, if you're saying 'well that's fine just make them CC Bruisers that's close enough' then I have no problems with this at all, but to me, until the Tank has a reason in PvP to use their personal damage reduction skill and expect it to actually not get ignored, they're not a Tank.
I think I see where we differ on this one. Fighters to me are higher in mobility, higher in damage potential, lower in CC potential, have a bigger range of damage types they can apply, more buff options and lower healthpools, lower resistances and almost no options in regards to taunts and forced attention pulls.
Not everyone likes the parallels made there but I think looking at the differentiation we can for example see in MOBAs between tanks and bruisers, it becomes clearer why one would make these decisions. Bruisers are there to actually take assassin type enemies down fast, tanks are more of a continuous damage source with little damage spike potential. Of course one can discuss whether such a distinction is necessary, but seeing that these two archetypes are part of the game design, I think they are already - as Steven put it - "not up for debate" in the context of this particular game. Let's hope they make both viable, for now I remain cautiously optimistic.
The more people around the more that can cycle the taunt, to want a taunt to work the same as PvE you have going to have target and aoe taunts. The more people that have skills like that more the often you will be taunted off the protection and more people it will affect in larger wars.
Yeah, but if the way the mechanic works is that you xant be taunted into are already under the effect of a taunt, and if you gain an immunity to CC (effectively very diminishes returns) after the effect of that CC has run its course, then you could have 100 tanks casting taunts on you non stop, and you would still only be affected by one every 8 - 10 seconds.
In a fast paced game, it is entirely possible that a taunt that moves tour camera may be a little disorienting. That's kind of the point,it makes you WANT to kill the tanks first, or at least distract them enough while your friends go after the healers.
The more people around the more that can cycle the taunt, to want a taunt to work the same as PvE you have going to have target and aoe taunts. The more people that have skills like that more the often you will be taunted off the protection and more people it will affect in larger wars.
Yeah, but if the way the mechanic works is that you xant be taunted into are already under the effect of a taunt, and if you gain an immunity to CC (effectively very diminishes returns) after the effect of that CC has run its course, then you could have 100 tanks casting taunts on you non stop, and you would still only be affected by one every 8 - 10 seconds.
In a fast paced game, it is entirely possible that a taunt that moves tour camera may be a little disorienting. That's kind of the point,it makes you WANT to kill the tanks first, or at least distract them enough while your friends go after the healers.
Im well aware you would be affect by one every 5-10 seconds that is still one every 5-10 seconds too much.
This point doesn't hold up it is disorienting and annoying so you go to kill them first? Effectively you could use the same argument about any skill that can ruin the overall experience of a game by saying kill them first.
The point i made earlier as well is a taunt doesn't mean anything about using your damage reduction against a player as well it doesn't make sense in action combat.
1. The skill would only last like a second or two, you aren't really testing out your defenses since you are just having a player focus you for a few seconds. Pretty much you are ruining the experience very almost minimal and no gain. Unless the taunt lasted like 5-10 seconds and was aoe so you could pick up 2-3 players it isn't doing much. And than the latter gets into broken level cc that are not fun for pvp.
2. Using it on a action based player again only ruins the experience and makes the game feel clunky where u random just can't control your camera. Which can be disorienting and very annoying even more so in larger pvp wars. This needs to be weighed in fun playability vrs just giving the taunt an affect like this for little to no reason. If players aren't forced to attack as well you are not testing how tanky you are.
3. As i said before this kind of taunt is more like a root, but one that would not be fun for any player to deal with and a much more annoying version of one. This kind of affect would benefit a bruiser and a assassin just as much, it isn't just isolated to a huge perk for a tank since it would just be a few second taunt or forced camera turn.
If a tank is going to test their durability you need to have true motivation to be attacking them, and not using a janky idea like forcing a camera to move that really doesn't force anyone to attack you. It just makes a game feel clunky.
This is why i suggest the idea of tanks having more zone control, and mentioned about having abilities that have a stronger affect on players unless the player attacks them. Creating a circumstance where players can reduce the effects or dmg on them, etc but attacking the tank or deal with the added consequences of not attacking them. It becomes a much more natural element that can lead tot he same result, without reducing the players experience in a way that takes control from players in the worse way possible with forced camera control.
This point doesn't hold up it is disorienting and annoying so you go to kill them first? Effectively you could use the same argument about any skill that can ruin the overall experience of a game by saying kill them first.
Your camera being moved a small amount every 10 seconds or so is not disorienting.
If it were 5 seconds as you are saying (I never said 5 seconds, the difference matters), then maybe.
Even then, the point of a taunt is to force you to stay on the tank. There is no need for tau ts to work if you are already going after someone with a tank primary. Add this in and you completely negate the camera spin, while taunts in general are having the desired effect (making players want to kill the tank first).
The point i made earlier as well is a taunt doesn't mean anything about using your damage reduction against a player as well it doesn't make sense in action combat.
I still fail to see what damage reduction has to do with taunt mechanics.
To the points you numbered 1 through to 3. To the first point, a big part of the effect of a taunt would be a change on player behavior. I PvP, you would probably want to take the tank down first, rather than going after the healer. In essence, this version of taunt is having the desired effect even without needing to be cast.
Your second point and third points are basically the same - CC sucks. This applies to all CC, and to all players. In this regard, adding this to taunts in Ashes would just be like adding another CC variation. Stuns and roots are equally not fun, but are significantly more restrictive than this version of a taunt would be (especially if players adjust tactics to always go for the tank first).
As to your suggestion of zone control - that is what this version of taunting would result in.
This point doesn't hold up it is disorienting and annoying so you go to kill them first? Effectively you could use the same argument about any skill that can ruin the overall experience of a game by saying kill them first.
Your camera being moved a small amount every 10 seconds or so is not disorienting.
If it were 5 seconds as you are saying (I never said 5 seconds, the difference matters), then maybe.
Even then, the point of a taunt is to force you to stay on the tank. There is no need for tau ts to work if you are already going after someone with a tank primary. Add this in and you completely negate the camera spin, while taunts in general are having the desired effect (making players want to kill the tank first).
The point i made earlier as well is a taunt doesn't mean anything about using your damage reduction against a player as well it doesn't make sense in action combat.
I still fail to see what damage reduction has to do with taunt mechanics.
To the points you numbered 1 through to 3. To the first point, a big part of the effect of a taunt would be a change on player behavior. I PvP, you would probably want to take the tank down first, rather than going after the healer. In essence, this version of taunt is having the desired effect even without needing to be cast.
Your second point and third points are basically the same - CC sucks. This applies to all CC, and to all players. In this regard, adding this to taunts in Ashes would just be like adding another CC variation. Stuns and roots are equally not fun, but are significantly more restrictive than this version of a taunt would be (especially if players adjust tactics to always go for the tank first).
As to your suggestion of zone control - that is what this version of taunting would result in.
This is getting into subjective points and also you play more tab games. To me and a lot of people every 10 seconds will be annoying. And also you are not the one to decide on the protection time of a cc 10 second protection doesn't sound realistic in a game like this that will have higher pace combat as well as with fewer skills. They will need to make sure there are more consistent ways to catch a player on top of the ttk being longer.
If you are already going after the tank and you are adding camera spin it is going to feel like input delay and feel clunky. This is why i keep telling you it is bad design for action camera, if you played more games like this it should be very clear how bad things feel not controlling your camera for any amount of time as you are in the motion of combat.
Lets not assume you are going after the tank though as im talking about general flow of combat with many people around you. Or there could be other tanks and it is pulling your focus and making the gameplay and combat feel clunky. If you are holding W to move forward and your camera is being affect you are going to be moving in weird arcs it is not a good feeling, that is clunky.
CC sucks for everyone yes but it part of the game. But there is a big different between a cc rooting you normally or stopping you from moving. And a CC that physically effects your camera that will be disorienting int he middle of large fights. Which do to your camera also being affected you "WASD" inputs will all be clunky as you need to go off someone else's manual control of your cameras and not your own control.
As to your suggestion of zone control - that is what this version of taunting would result in.
To an extent yes but the point is it ruins the experience of everyone else and does it in a very boring way. The kit of a tank should be fun and have zone control not relying on a taunt, or using the taunt you design it in a way that ensures things are fun without bringing down the experience of every other player. You can put anything in the game you the balance of what it does and how it affects players should always be taken into consideration.
Why can we not think of ways to tackle this without lowering the bar of experience for the rest of the players?
Why can we not think of ways to tackle this without lowering the bar of experience for the rest of the players?
Because that experience is intended. What you call clunkiness is what the rest of us consider 'the point of the ability'.
If I have a choice between 'being CCed so that I can't finish an aimed attack on a target in front of me' and 'being forced to point at another player so that the attack can be released and automatically hit that player' I'm definitely choosing the second.
And this is coming from me whose characters/Archetypes usually have frustratingly high execution requirements already. This implementation would not even phase me. I just accept "I have been taunted/grabbed and my best option now is to hit the Tank'" because that's the point of the taunt.
What feels clunky to you feels totally normal to me. Realistic? Probably not. Frustrating? Not at all. Clunky? Absolutely not.
You can throw out your usual 'You don't speak for everyone, me and a lot of people not in this thread don't like it!' but I am speaking only for me here. I'm not telling you that you should change your mind and consider it not clunky, but I'm also not finding many people in this thread who have your perspective so obviously no one here pays much attention to your 'me and a couple of the guys think this is clunky. You don't know them. they're definitely agreeing with me though, there's a lot of them'.
Have there been a game with this kind of mechanic before? Would be interesting to see proper reactions to it, rather than imagining how one or another group of people would feel about it.
Why can we not think of ways to tackle this without lowering the bar of experience for the rest of the players?
Because that experience is intended. What you call clunkiness is what the rest of us consider 'the point of the ability'.
If I have a choice between 'being CCed so that I can't finish an aimed attack on a target in front of me' and 'being forced to point at another player so that the attack can be released and automatically hit that player' I'm definitely choosing the second.
And this is coming from me whose characters/Archetypes usually have frustratingly high execution requirements already. This implementation would not even phase me. I just accept "I have been taunted/grabbed and my best option now is to hit the Tank'" because that's the point of the taunt.
What feels clunky to you feels totally normal to me. Realistic? Probably not. Frustrating? Not at all. Clunky? Absolutely not.
You can throw out your usual 'You don't speak for everyone, me and a lot of people not in this thread don't like it!' but I am speaking only for me here. I'm not telling you that you should change your mind and consider it not clunky, but I'm also not finding many people in this thread who have your perspective so obviously no one here pays much attention to your 'me and a couple of the guys think this is clunky. You don't know them. they're definitely agreeing with me though, there's a lot of them'.
What you are saying screams "I want this i don't care about it feeling bad more clunky" So indeed you are truly only speaking for yourself while not refuting all the points that make it clunky.
If that is the case more than equally people saying they don't' want it and also having a valid reason ontop of it would make more sense to listen to them.
"I have been taunted/grabbed and my best option now is to hit the Tank'"
You realize this can be done without clunky camera controls right? In my suggestion I already mentioned their effects are strong on you (within reason) unless you hit the enemy that has taunted you.
But if you are dead set, don't care about any other approach and want forced cameras controls no matter what I don't think there is room left for discussion so you can want what you want lol.
Have there been a game with this kind of mechanic before? Would be interesting to see proper reactions to it, rather than imagining how one or another group of people would feel about it.
Closest is smite and it is very annoying, in a mmo this would be compounded by more players and not being designed around 5. smite only has a few character with this but they can be more liberal with their stuff including have skills that make your screen black.
You aren't going to find games with action camera that you are being taunted every so often and forced to look at something even more so in faster paced games. Any normal person would see why that would be annoying as well as the effects it brings. (Of course I'm talking about PvP, you can be more open in pve experiences)
This is why I'm saying it is a consumer idea, there are a lot of ideas on the forums and a lot of bad ones. Take for example game needs to release earlier, AoC is P2W, adding a jail system in the game players vote, on, etc.
I'm open to talking about things in a way that makes things work but the core of the issue with forced camera spinning doesn't change no matter how you implement it. It is one thing to get knocked back, it is another for your cameras to be spinning on a arc while you still have "WASD" movement as do to how the camera controls your movement it is going tot throw off all your inputs and feel clunky + disorienting.
Which chars do that? I wanna try looking at how it works. Cause I have an imagine in my mind how I'd prefer it to work or how I could see it working (w/o it being annoying for me), but I'm interested in a pre-established application.
Have there been a game with this kind of mechanic before? Would be interesting to see proper reactions to it, rather than imagining how one or another group of people would feel about it.
Yeah both Smite and Predecessor do it, one or two others do similar things. You know this is just me 'dancing around triggering Mag7', but it just isn't that big a deal to a lot of people. Pretty sure something in Paladins has it, and I feel like an Overwatch character did too but I can't find it now.
Whether that's because they didn't or because most people just accept it without complaining about it, you can decide.
This thread is 90% 'Mag ranting about something he personally dislikes enough to feel that other people must dislike it too'. I've never had a serious discussion with anyone else who cared so I can't say how meaningful the effect is.
Important part, her Ultimate is Forced Facing and CC too. I think there's at least two other 'forced facing' but I can't even remember because I have never seriously put much thought into this before now because it feels so normal to me.
This is what makes this discussion hard to even have properly. I can't find even any random old forum posts complaining about this in other games.
@Mag7spy can you help us out with that? Just a thread on Reddit or whatever for literally any game that implements this (maybe you can find a SMITE one?) with some other people who have the same opinion as you do?
Which chars do that? I wanna try looking at how it works. Cause I have an imagine in my mind how I'd prefer it to work or how I could see it working (w/o it being annoying for me), but I'm interested in a pre-established application.
Athena has a taunt, and so does Serqet, but both skills are skill based with limited ranges (especially serqet).
I can see a problem wit this idea, and I'm not the only one just generally wouldn't would not think something like this would be included.
@NiKr remember with these types of games (or if it is a ultimate the causes it) it is balanced around 5 people and they have limited ranges and are skill shots. If you included something like a mmorpg level taunt with the range and it was a auto effect and not a skill shot it be one of the most annoying thing in any of these games.
I can see a problem wit this idea, and I'm not the only one just generally wouldn't would not think something like this would be included.
@NiKr remember with these types of games (or if it is a ultimate the causes it) it is balanced around 5 people and they have limited ranges and are skill shots. If you included something like a mmorpg level taunt with the range and it was a auto effect and not a skill shot it be one of the most annoying thing in any of these games.
If you have a long enough cooldown and there's some form of CC protection in the game, then there's no issue because you can play around it. Either by building anti CC items, or by attacking when the taunt is down and the character cannot otherwise force you to shift your focus.
Grilled cheese always tastes better when you eat it together!
I can see a problem wit this idea, and I'm not the only one just generally wouldn't would not think something like this would be included.
@NiKr remember with these types of games (or if it is a ultimate the causes it) it is balanced around 5 people and they have limited ranges and are skill shots. If you included something like a mmorpg level taunt with the range and it was a auto effect and not a skill shot it be one of the most annoying thing in any of these games.
If you have a long enough cooldown and there's some form of CC protection in the game, then there's no issue because you can play around it. Either by building anti CC items, or by attacking when the taunt is down and the character cannot otherwise force you to shift your focus.
The issue is constant forced camera control and chunkiness, I'm not talking about general cc prevention.
Keyword for the discussion is "forced camera control + lingering camera control"
I can see a problem wit this idea, and I'm not the only one just generally wouldn't would not think something like this would be included.
@NiKr remember with these types of games (or if it is a ultimate the causes it) it is balanced around 5 people and they have limited ranges and are skill shots. If you included something like a mmorpg level taunt with the range and it was a auto effect and not a skill shot it be one of the most annoying thing in any of these games.
If you have a long enough cooldown and there's some form of CC protection in the game, then there's no issue because you can play around it. Either by building anti CC items, or by attacking when the taunt is down and the character cannot otherwise force you to shift your focus.
The issue is constant forced camera control and chunkiness, I'm not talking about general cc prevention.
Stun and direction doesn't matter as much what we are talking about is a taunt and not being able to have control of camera during the duration.
Yeah.... For someone that complains that others don't read or can't understand what you are saying so much, you certainly seem to struggle yourself here, and make a ton of assumptions on top of it. Unfortunately for you this means that your constant 'you don't read what I write!' tirades make you seem not very credible and your 'counter-arguments' even more ignorable.
So once again from the top.... "Leap to a nearby enemy hero, forcing them to face Countess and Suppress them for .75 seconds. After the duration, Countess deals magical damage (+10% of the target's maximum health) to the target and heals herself for 50% of the damage dealt."
Stun and direction doesn't matter as much what we are talking about is a taunt and not being able to have control of camera during the duration.
Yeah.... For someone that complains that others don't read or can't understand what you are saying so much, you certainly seem to struggle yourself here, and make a ton of assumptions on top of it. Unfortunately for you this means that your constant 'you don't read what I write!' tirades make you seem not very credible and your 'counter-arguments' even more ignorable.
So once again from the top.... "Leap to a nearby enemy hero, forcing them to face Countess and Suppress them for .75 seconds. After the duration, Countess deals magical damage (+10% of the target's maximum health) to the target and heals herself for 50% of the damage dealt."
Jumping into the conversation that moves from insults and you trying to move it back to insults? Actually golden award for you.
Did you really not watch the video I linked, did you also not read what I wrote? If you are going to jump into the conversation with reading insults please read the post you are quoting on it, kind of embarrassing.
The move is a CC that makes your character face the character. Being hard CC (stun) is not a taunt (cc).
Why are you talking about a stun skill, this is not a taunt..
That video is cool and all, but I'm trying to see the effect from the pov of the victim
Actually yeah that might be easier @Mag7spy, can you find a SMITE video from the perspective of someone being taunted/Forced Targeted for NiKr?
I don't wanna get caught up in the specifics of Countess' forced target so let's just use the one you know. Nothing worse than arguing with someone about experiences they don't even have.
Comments
The part that isn't clear is that you are saying no one wants a thing that no one has said could happen.
Let's imagine that taunts are added to the game where the taunt value of the ability dictates the duration of the forced target in PvP. If you are taunted, you can't then be taunted by another tank. If that taunt wears off, you would gain an immunity to taunt for at least a few seconds.
In reality, this means you are not going to be taunted more than once every 8 - 10 seconds or so - and that is the actual worst case scenario.
The problem is, you are too busy yelling and screaming (in text form) actual nonsense that makes no sense (hense nonsense). When you are doing this, people can't get to the root of the misunderstanding that you have made (which is the case literally every time), because you are too busy screaming that we aren't listening to you.
I've told you I'm not skimming when I'm quoting. Or are you not doing basic reading now as you quote?
Yeah, but that was a lie.
I mean, even if it wasn't, ideas are not contained wihtin one post most of the time. You may skim read a few things then get to one post that you want to reply to.Even if you did read that entire post, you aren't reading the entire conversation.
As such, you are not informing yourself before you speak.
if you arent reading the whole discussion, you can't demand others inform you of the things you have missed - that is assuming you are even capable of articulating which aspects you need clarification on (I've yet to see this - you just start yelling).
Imagine jumping on here to try to argue what someone is thinking and keep doing it to derail a thread.
The only lie here is you trying to force your thinking on someone else and try hard to put words in some ones mouth.
No one needs to read a whole discussion to have their own view point, the moment you decided to quote me we are talking about the camera being forcefully not other points in the thread as was the disccusion that was brought up in your reply.
If you want to talk about the rest of the thread do it with the others that are talking about it, if you are going to quote me on a certain point with what I'm talking about, expect that to be the conversation not the rest of the thread.
All you needed to do was stick to talking about camera and me being against anything that can affect it in a strong negative way in terms of action camera.
Why is it so hard for you to understand, i thought you were more capable than that...
Indeed - if you are happy having an uninformed opinion on the matter, sure.
The thing is, if you aren't going out of your way to inform your own opinion, you shouldn't really argue that opinion against people that have gone out of their way to inform themselves.
If you are entering a debate with an uninformed opinion and others in said debate have an informed opinion, you should be taking part in that debate with the actual expectation that your opinion will be changed. In fact, that is the only reason you should enter such a debate - in order to have your uninformed opinion challenged.
Some people here think that I do exactly what I said not to do above. Thing is, I dont enter debates (or even discussions, really) unless I am already somewhat informed on the topic. Additionally, if I am going to debate a topic, I commit to learning more about it.
An example of each over the last few years have been the fact that I initially hated the idea of PvE cage fights. NiKr was the person that first told me about them, and at first I thought they sounded stupid. However, I listened to what he had to say about them, questioned him on a few things, and now I think they would be a great addition to any MMO with open world PvP and PvE together.
In terms of committing to learning, ever since I started debating the merits of solid PvE within a game like Ashes, I've committed myself to learning more about L2 specifically (and a little more about BDO as well), since they are games that often come up.
While I wouldnt say I am an expert on either (I know more about BDO thiugh, as I played it for a good while), I at least went out and learned about it so I am at least a little informed when debating or discussing. I mean, I'd love to, but you need to do the same.
What you have done in this thread is stated your stance, but then refused to clarify anything at all about it. I mean, we get it, you are against the idea, you think its clunky and you dont want to have tour camera spin every second. Cool, that much is clear.
What you havent done is explained why you think any of the above.
I mean, as I pointed out in an above post, the absolute worst case scenario is that you would be taunted once every 8 - 10 seconds - but that is assuming you are in a bad situation and are not trying to get yourself out of it.
You've not bothered to comment on that at all - choosing instead to accuse me of derailing the thread, despite me having just handed you a blatantly clear means by which to further the discussion.
I'm waiting for you to say "I didnt see that post" because or course you didnt, you don't think you need to read in order to participate in a forum discussion.
I think you really need to go back over your post that started this conversation and really take a second look at what you are saying. You disregard my post as a bad take when i outline cam being moved around is clunky in effects and disorientating in combat when you have wars with a crap ton of people around.
Instead of talking about the exact points u change the entire direction of the conversation the devs are going to do it right and not put broken things in the game. "I agree devs will do a good job and your idea is very consumer based and devs would not implement something that would make action based camera worse.
This has nothing to do with being uninformed you are straight up just being ignorant and disregarding concerns and not attempting to understand the concern. Or talk about how a feature like that would not be a issue. Instead you beat around the bush saying things that don't get us anywhere and the most obvious things. Another example "CC is a bad thing if it is done in excess" everyone is aware of that and it doesn't change the experience being ruined losing control of your camera....
If you want more exact details on my train of thought, instead of arguing, being passive aggressive, putting words in my mouth ask on the exact certain points with questions so you can be better informed and lead to a proper discussion. You are the one quoting, not the other way around that started this.
How many people are around has no impact at all on this discussion.
How often you can be taunted however, does.
If you can only be taunted once every 10 seconds or so, why would it matter if there is only one other person around or 100 other people around?
Now, if you think it does indeed matter, you need to explain why you think it matters.
In order for me to be able to disregard your concerns, you would first need to communicate what they actually are.
So far, you havent done that. The above portion of this post is my THIRD attempt to get you to move this conversation on by explaining why you think the above is an issue.
The way you have worded your objections makes it seem like players would be able to bounce a rivals camera around essentially at will - yet that would clearly not be possible. However, rather than assuming you think that, I have been trying to get you to clear it up
In terms of putting words in people mouths, you are the one that rewrote a point that I made, altering words key to portraying the meaning and then demanded I answer yes or no to your rewrite. That is putting words in someones mouth.
What I am doing is simply pointing out where there may be a disconnect, and asking you to explain what you mean, using as many or as few of your own words as you like.
Literally the opposite of putting words in your mouth - I am trying to get you to speak for yourself.
Ashes should think about how fights evolve and what the specific roles in those fights look like as the fights themselves shift.
The more people around the more that can cycle the taunt, to want a taunt to work the same as PvE you have going to have target and aoe taunts. The more people that have skills like that more the often you will be taunted off the protection and more people it will affect in larger wars.
We don't know the balance they are going for with cc protection so the protection could be less that 10 seconds, i view it at being around 5 seconds since 10 seems pretty long to not b cc'd base on having limited amount of skills and the game will have a faster pace so more cc will be needed. But still something we will have to see later on but 10 secs seems like you are trying to stretch it pretty far and doesn't seem realistic.
So again the more people around the more will have their taunts off cooldown and more quickly catch you off your protect timer. As well as be able to taunt more people I'm unsure why you don't see this connection.
I have said this atleast 5 times already but ill repeat again.... if the game is a bit faster pace and you are trying to keep track of a lot of things and focus on combat. Physically having something move your camera suddenly in the middle of the fight and lose control of it adds immensely clunky gameplay. That is one of the worse feelings you can have, sometimes games have it sprinkled in, the only notable one I can think of is smite. Though that kind of thing isn't being spammed on you nor in ever single game as only a few character have it again. In a mmorpg where their are tanks everywhere it is going to be a bad feeling of life dealing with a lack of control at times that will throw people off and make gameplay feel not good.
I'm going to ignore the bottom part of the post so we can just focus on actual meaningful discussion around the taunt and why I feel that does not work with action camera in making things feel bad.
The moment this taunt does not affect or move your camera i have 0 issues.
I think I see where we differ on this one. Fighters to me are higher in mobility, higher in damage potential, lower in CC potential, have a bigger range of damage types they can apply, more buff options and lower healthpools, lower resistances and almost no options in regards to taunts and forced attention pulls.
Not everyone likes the parallels made there but I think looking at the differentiation we can for example see in MOBAs between tanks and bruisers, it becomes clearer why one would make these decisions. Bruisers are there to actually take assassin type enemies down fast, tanks are more of a continuous damage source with little damage spike potential. Of course one can discuss whether such a distinction is necessary, but seeing that these two archetypes are part of the game design, I think they are already - as Steven put it - "not up for debate" in the context of this particular game. Let's hope they make both viable, for now I remain cautiously optimistic.
Yeah, but if the way the mechanic works is that you xant be taunted into are already under the effect of a taunt, and if you gain an immunity to CC (effectively very diminishes returns) after the effect of that CC has run its course, then you could have 100 tanks casting taunts on you non stop, and you would still only be affected by one every 8 - 10 seconds.
In a fast paced game, it is entirely possible that a taunt that moves tour camera may be a little disorienting. That's kind of the point,it makes you WANT to kill the tanks first, or at least distract them enough while your friends go after the healers.
Im well aware you would be affect by one every 5-10 seconds that is still one every 5-10 seconds too much.
This point doesn't hold up it is disorienting and annoying so you go to kill them first? Effectively you could use the same argument about any skill that can ruin the overall experience of a game by saying kill them first.
The point i made earlier as well is a taunt doesn't mean anything about using your damage reduction against a player as well it doesn't make sense in action combat.
1. The skill would only last like a second or two, you aren't really testing out your defenses since you are just having a player focus you for a few seconds. Pretty much you are ruining the experience very almost minimal and no gain. Unless the taunt lasted like 5-10 seconds and was aoe so you could pick up 2-3 players it isn't doing much. And than the latter gets into broken level cc that are not fun for pvp.
2. Using it on a action based player again only ruins the experience and makes the game feel clunky where u random just can't control your camera. Which can be disorienting and very annoying even more so in larger pvp wars. This needs to be weighed in fun playability vrs just giving the taunt an affect like this for little to no reason. If players aren't forced to attack as well you are not testing how tanky you are.
3. As i said before this kind of taunt is more like a root, but one that would not be fun for any player to deal with and a much more annoying version of one. This kind of affect would benefit a bruiser and a assassin just as much, it isn't just isolated to a huge perk for a tank since it would just be a few second taunt or forced camera turn.
If a tank is going to test their durability you need to have true motivation to be attacking them, and not using a janky idea like forcing a camera to move that really doesn't force anyone to attack you. It just makes a game feel clunky.
This is why i suggest the idea of tanks having more zone control, and mentioned about having abilities that have a stronger affect on players unless the player attacks them. Creating a circumstance where players can reduce the effects or dmg on them, etc but attacking the tank or deal with the added consequences of not attacking them. It becomes a much more natural element that can lead tot he same result, without reducing the players experience in a way that takes control from players in the worse way possible with forced camera control.
Your camera being moved a small amount every 10 seconds or so is not disorienting.
If it were 5 seconds as you are saying (I never said 5 seconds, the difference matters), then maybe.
Even then, the point of a taunt is to force you to stay on the tank. There is no need for tau ts to work if you are already going after someone with a tank primary. Add this in and you completely negate the camera spin, while taunts in general are having the desired effect (making players want to kill the tank first).
I still fail to see what damage reduction has to do with taunt mechanics.
To the points you numbered 1 through to 3. To the first point, a big part of the effect of a taunt would be a change on player behavior. I PvP, you would probably want to take the tank down first, rather than going after the healer. In essence, this version of taunt is having the desired effect even without needing to be cast.
Your second point and third points are basically the same - CC sucks. This applies to all CC, and to all players. In this regard, adding this to taunts in Ashes would just be like adding another CC variation. Stuns and roots are equally not fun, but are significantly more restrictive than this version of a taunt would be (especially if players adjust tactics to always go for the tank first).
As to your suggestion of zone control - that is what this version of taunting would result in.
This is getting into subjective points and also you play more tab games. To me and a lot of people every 10 seconds will be annoying. And also you are not the one to decide on the protection time of a cc 10 second protection doesn't sound realistic in a game like this that will have higher pace combat as well as with fewer skills. They will need to make sure there are more consistent ways to catch a player on top of the ttk being longer.
If you are already going after the tank and you are adding camera spin it is going to feel like input delay and feel clunky. This is why i keep telling you it is bad design for action camera, if you played more games like this it should be very clear how bad things feel not controlling your camera for any amount of time as you are in the motion of combat.
Lets not assume you are going after the tank though as im talking about general flow of combat with many people around you. Or there could be other tanks and it is pulling your focus and making the gameplay and combat feel clunky. If you are holding W to move forward and your camera is being affect you are going to be moving in weird arcs it is not a good feeling, that is clunky.
CC sucks for everyone yes but it part of the game. But there is a big different between a cc rooting you normally or stopping you from moving. And a CC that physically effects your camera that will be disorienting int he middle of large fights. Which do to your camera also being affected you "WASD" inputs will all be clunky as you need to go off someone else's manual control of your cameras and not your own control.
To an extent yes but the point is it ruins the experience of everyone else and does it in a very boring way. The kit of a tank should be fun and have zone control not relying on a taunt, or using the taunt you design it in a way that ensures things are fun without bringing down the experience of every other player. You can put anything in the game you the balance of what it does and how it affects players should always be taken into consideration.
Why can we not think of ways to tackle this without lowering the bar of experience for the rest of the players?
Because that experience is intended. What you call clunkiness is what the rest of us consider 'the point of the ability'.
If I have a choice between 'being CCed so that I can't finish an aimed attack on a target in front of me' and 'being forced to point at another player so that the attack can be released and automatically hit that player' I'm definitely choosing the second.
And this is coming from me whose characters/Archetypes usually have frustratingly high execution requirements already. This implementation would not even phase me. I just accept "I have been taunted/grabbed and my best option now is to hit the Tank'" because that's the point of the taunt.
What feels clunky to you feels totally normal to me. Realistic? Probably not. Frustrating? Not at all. Clunky? Absolutely not.
You can throw out your usual 'You don't speak for everyone, me and a lot of people not in this thread don't like it!' but I am speaking only for me here. I'm not telling you that you should change your mind and consider it not clunky, but I'm also not finding many people in this thread who have your perspective so obviously no one here pays much attention to your 'me and a couple of the guys think this is clunky. You don't know them. they're definitely agreeing with me though, there's a lot of them'.
What you are saying screams "I want this i don't care about it feeling bad more clunky" So indeed you are truly only speaking for yourself while not refuting all the points that make it clunky.
If that is the case more than equally people saying they don't' want it and also having a valid reason ontop of it would make more sense to listen to them.
You realize this can be done without clunky camera controls right? In my suggestion I already mentioned their effects are strong on you (within reason) unless you hit the enemy that has taunted you.
But if you are dead set, don't care about any other approach and want forced cameras controls no matter what I don't think there is room left for discussion so you can want what you want lol.
Closest is smite and it is very annoying, in a mmo this would be compounded by more players and not being designed around 5. smite only has a few character with this but they can be more liberal with their stuff including have skills that make your screen black.
You aren't going to find games with action camera that you are being taunted every so often and forced to look at something even more so in faster paced games. Any normal person would see why that would be annoying as well as the effects it brings. (Of course I'm talking about PvP, you can be more open in pve experiences)
This is why I'm saying it is a consumer idea, there are a lot of ideas on the forums and a lot of bad ones. Take for example game needs to release earlier, AoC is P2W, adding a jail system in the game players vote, on, etc.
I'm open to talking about things in a way that makes things work but the core of the issue with forced camera spinning doesn't change no matter how you implement it. It is one thing to get knocked back, it is another for your cameras to be spinning on a arc while you still have "WASD" movement as do to how the camera controls your movement it is going tot throw off all your inputs and feel clunky + disorienting.
Yeah both Smite and Predecessor do it, one or two others do similar things. You know this is just me 'dancing around triggering Mag7', but it just isn't that big a deal to a lot of people. Pretty sure something in Paladins has it, and I feel like an Overwatch character did too but I can't find it now.
Whether that's because they didn't or because most people just accept it without complaining about it, you can decide.
This thread is 90% 'Mag ranting about something he personally dislikes enough to feel that other people must dislike it too'. I've never had a serious discussion with anyone else who cared so I can't say how meaningful the effect is.
https://predecessor.fandom.com/wiki/Countess
Important part, her Ultimate is Forced Facing and CC too. I think there's at least two other 'forced facing' but I can't even remember because I have never seriously put much thought into this before now because it feels so normal to me.
This is what makes this discussion hard to even have properly. I can't find even any random old forum posts complaining about this in other games.
@Mag7spy can you help us out with that? Just a thread on Reddit or whatever for literally any game that implements this (maybe you can find a SMITE one?) with some other people who have the same opinion as you do?
Athena has a taunt, and so does Serqet, but both skills are skill based with limited ranges (especially serqet).
@NiKr remember with these types of games (or if it is a ultimate the causes it) it is balanced around 5 people and they have limited ranges and are skill shots. If you included something like a mmorpg level taunt with the range and it was a auto effect and not a skill shot it be one of the most annoying thing in any of these games.
Stun and direction doesn't matter as much what we are talking about is a taunt and not being able to have control of camera during the duration.
If you have a long enough cooldown and there's some form of CC protection in the game, then there's no issue because you can play around it. Either by building anti CC items, or by attacking when the taunt is down and the character cannot otherwise force you to shift your focus.
The issue is constant forced camera control and chunkiness, I'm not talking about general cc prevention.
Keyword for the discussion is "forced camera control + lingering camera control"
If it's not constant it's fine.
Yeah.... For someone that complains that others don't read or can't understand what you are saying so much, you certainly seem to struggle yourself here, and make a ton of assumptions on top of it. Unfortunately for you this means that your constant 'you don't read what I write!' tirades make you seem not very credible and your 'counter-arguments' even more ignorable.
So once again from the top.... "Leap to a nearby enemy hero, forcing them to face Countess and Suppress them for .75 seconds. After the duration, Countess deals magical damage (+10% of the target's maximum health) to the target and heals herself for 50% of the damage dealt."
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Yhr9WpjaDzw
Jumping into the conversation that moves from insults and you trying to move it back to insults? Actually golden award for you.
Did you really not watch the video I linked, did you also not read what I wrote? If you are going to jump into the conversation with reading insults please read the post you are quoting on it, kind of embarrassing.
The move is a CC that makes your character face the character. Being hard CC (stun) is not a taunt (cc).
Actually yeah that might be easier @Mag7spy, can you find a SMITE video from the perspective of someone being taunted/Forced Targeted for NiKr?
I don't wanna get caught up in the specifics of Countess' forced target so let's just use the one you know. Nothing worse than arguing with someone about experiences they don't even have.