Aggro/Threat mechanics don't work in PvX

MMORPG's have traditionally used a system of mob AI called Aggro in which a mob will preferentially attack player characters which perform certain actions, primarily that of dealing damage to the mob but later expanded to things like healing friendly characters. This was a simple AI which fit the constraints of early computer processor cycles while producing mob behavior which was better than the most primitive system of just attacking the nearest target or most recent attacker. Such simplistic AI would have allowed trivially easy control of what character a mob attacked making for dull and unchallenging PvE.

Under aggro systems Tanking classes were given special skills which move them up the mob priority list despite a low damage output from the Tank. In essence they break the otherwise effective AI of a mob and force it into inefficiently attacking the character most resistant to that attack. So long as mobs are balanced around this mechanic the gameplay is reasonably compelling mix of puzzle, timing and teamwork and it makes the Tanks role of being a meat-shield far more skillful and enjoyable then it would otherwise be if it was completely passive.

The problem is that these whole dynamic collapses when the opponent is not an AI but instead another player with full awareness of how the game works and full freedom to attack whomever they wish. And yet Tanking IS a viable class in most PvP games because Tanks are built differently in such games so as to make opposing players either rationally choose to attack the tank rather than another target or allow the Tank to create situations in which opponents have no other option but to attack them thus expending offensive potential inefficiently.

AoC would be far better off replicating Tank design from PvP games such as Overwatch and LoL and pairing them with mob AI's that seek to replicate the rational choices that a human would make in combat that cause them to attack Tanks. This will allow Tank gameplay to be consistent from PvE to PvP.

Well established PvP Tank mechanics include targeted pull effects, silence or other enemy DPS reductions, 'vaulting' into the middle of enemy groupings, increased damage potential when surrounded, projectile shields and movement barriers.

Some new methods which might be explored would be 'blinding' type effects on opponents which allow only nearby characters to be seen and attacked. An effect which leashes a melee opponent to remain within a short distance of the Tank. A damage redirection from nearby allies towards the Tank. I'm sure other skills can be created which provide control of enemy damage which would be effective on both players and AI.

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Mag7spy

NiKr wrote: »

Ok, I saw how Serqet's taunt works. It's a direct pull of the camera and hold of it for like 1s. It disorientates you a bit because the screen moves really damn quickly, but that is the point of a taunt imo.

So now, Mag, your ideal goal would be to find any and all feedback from smite players that complain about this mechanic. If you don't want to do that and will just say (as you have been) that "imagine 20 people doing that to you" - that is not an argument. And it's not because Intrepid have probably a dozen ways of designing the mechanic of such a taunt in a way where "20 people" can't just keep pulling your camera all over the place.

Also, the move of the screen itself doesn't have to be that jarring. It could be a slight slowish slide instead of an instant snap. Though even that is arguable, because either of those serve their own purposes in a fight.

Mag7spy wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zC07LNGirPQ

1:34 you can see how they lose control of the camera, though this one is stronger since they can't cast skills and such or more with "WASD" it is a forced attack.

If they were moving away from them or not knowing hey were there they would be flipped around and forced to move to the target. In larger fights with a lot going on you would be pulled constantly with that kind of effect going on in a mmorpg sense. Even more so with the range that would be on the taunt.

That one is way smoother, so even less of a problem imo.

So yeah, if you manage to find feedback where people dislike this - I'll get your point much better. Right now I see literally no problem with a taunt that pulls your camera.

ALSO! Just to make sure that I'm clear here. What I'm suggesting (and I think what Noaani was suggesting) is just the movement of the camera. Your char doesn't move on its own, it's not being pulled physically or anything of the sort. Your camera just starts to move towards the tank that taunted you and it's your task to account for that in your movement/actions. Those smite players seemed to have been doing fine.

And as I've already said before, in all 12 years of me playing as (and against) a tank - I've not once seen more than 3 aggroing classes on one person. And I've participated in fights ranging in size from 9v9 to several hundred vs several hundred.

Before i go into depth on answering this are you suggesting that a mmorpg and the things that come with it, should have the same balancing as a moba design wise? (I'm not saying you have no cc protection).

This is an important question before I get into more details with one game being hybrid and one being full action. Why this question is important is how balancing is approached is greatly different between what a moba and a mmorpg will be doing as well as the scale of conflict.

Not a loaded question either you can say yes or no, but it will change how I approach answering.

Ludullu

Azherae wrote: »

I would request that this generally doesn't affect a person's camera facing more than once every 5 seconds even if there are many tanks timing it. Subject to testing, I'd be okay with this experience, but you should factor for 'higher than that' maybe since I have quite good reactions/spatial awareness.

I'd personally go for smth like a 10s debuff that pans the camera slowly towards the tank every 5 secs (so 3 times overall) and if the taunt is recast by someone else, the direction of the pan just shifts toward that new caster but w/o the on-cast effect.

This way each tank would have to pay a ton of attention to their target, if they wanted to chain-taunt it. And that seems like a perfect way to absolutely waste a ton of super valuable tank time. And if they don't try to perfectly space out their taunts, then they're either overlapping and wasting their CDs or their taunts are spread out more than 5s apart, at which point the effect is at a steady rate that a player can adjust to.

Ideally, this effect would also depend on a stat that has a counter-stat that reduces the speed of the pan (maybe even to 0). Could be a resistance buff as well, though I'd prefer just a stat relation, cause imo that would make the builds deeper and more interesting.

Ludullu

Mag7spy wrote: »

Before i go into depth on answering this are you suggesting that a mmorpg and the things that come with it, should have the same balancing as a moba design wise? (I'm not saying you have no cc protection).

This is an important question before I get into more details with one game being hybrid and one being full action. Why this question is important is how balancing is approached is greatly different between what a moba and a mmorpg will be doing as well as the scale of conflict.

Not a loaded question either you can say yes or no, but it will change how I approach answering.

Nope. It's for the exact reason of Intrepid having more design freedom in how they approach this mechanic, that I believe it would not be jarring or annoying. And it would let them balance it in a better way than a direct copy from smite/predecessor would lead to.

Mag7spy

NiKr wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

I would request that this generally doesn't affect a person's camera facing more than once every 5 seconds even if there are many tanks timing it. Subject to testing, I'd be okay with this experience, but you should factor for 'higher than that' maybe since I have quite good reactions/spatial awareness.

I'd personally go for smth like a 10s debuff that pans the camera slowly towards the tank every 5 secs (so 3 times overall) and if the taunt is recast by someone else, the direction of the pan just shifts toward that new caster but w/o the on-cast effect.

This way each tank would have to pay a ton of attention to their target, if they wanted to chain-taunt it. And that seems like a perfect way to absolutely waste a ton of super valuable tank time. And if they don't try to perfectly space out their taunts, then they're either overlapping and wasting their CDs or their taunts are spread out more than 5s apart, at which point the effect is at a steady rate that a player can adjust to.

Ideally, this effect would also depend on a stat that has a counter-stat that reduces the speed of the pan (maybe even to 0). Could be a resistance buff as well, though I'd prefer just a stat relation, cause imo that would make the builds deeper and more interesting.

Honestly i think im reading wrong or something, did you say your camera pans every certain amount of seconds over the duration of a debuff?

Ludullu

Mag7spy wrote: »

Honestly i think im reading wrong or something, did you say your camera pans every certain amount of seconds over the duration of a debuff?

The pan would be no longer than 2s, it would be slow and, yes, it would repeat 3 times over the duration of the buff. This is how I see a pvp taunt working where you'd have to, at the very least, pay attention to the tank and his positioning instead of your preferred target. And it would be on the tank to spin you around from other targets.

And if you notice that you're the main target of taunts - you'd be able to build against them. This wasn't a thing in L2 afaik.

Mag7spy

NiKr wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Before i go into depth on answering this are you suggesting that a mmorpg and the things that come with it, should have the same balancing as a moba design wise? (I'm not saying you have no cc protection).

This is an important question before I get into more details with one game being hybrid and one being full action. Why this question is important is how balancing is approached is greatly different between what a moba and a mmorpg will be doing as well as the scale of conflict.

Not a loaded question either you can say yes or no, but it will change how I approach answering.

Nope. It's for the exact reason of Intrepid having more design freedom in how they approach this mechanic, that I believe it would not be jarring or annoying. And it would let them balance it in a better way than a direct copy from smite/predecessor would lead to.

ok If the answer is no, what does other people playing smite with their opinions have to do with Camera affecting skills. As in the game their complains would be around smaller fights, non tab target skills (aka a taunt that is not a skill shots), and very minimal chance to encounter that kind of affect besides a characters I can count on one hand?

By default opinion and voices on it are not going to be as loud as there are 8 archetypes in AoC so we can say one in 1-8 to run into a tank. Where in smite it be like a 2-100 to run into it roughly.

(this is not to say there aren't voices by the way but based on how smite is being designed differently voices and complains might be else where again from a design stand point and the options of characters to pick..)

Mag7spy

NiKr wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Honestly i think im reading wrong or something, did you say your camera pans every certain amount of seconds over the duration of a debuff?

The pan would be no longer than 2s, it would be slow and, yes, it would repeat 3 times over the duration of the buff. This is how I see a pvp taunt working where you'd have to, at the very least, pay attention to the tank and his positioning instead of your preferred target. And it would be on the tank to spin you around from other targets.

And if you notice that you're the main target of taunts - you'd be able to build against them. This wasn't a thing in L2 afaik.

This sounds like a very tab idea mind set, my voice point is strong on it being once every 5-10 seconds even if that taunt lasted one second. This sounds like one of the most unenjoyable effects I've heard of though , please don't take offense to that but that is just how i see it.

Ludullu

Mag7spy wrote: »

ok If the answer is no, what does other people playing smite with their opinions have to do with Camera affecting skills. As in the game their complains would be around smaller fights, non tab target skills (aka a taunt that is not a skill shots), and very minimal chance to encounter that kind of affect besides a characters I can count on one hand?

By default opinion and voices on it are not going to be as loud as there are 8 archetypes in AoC so we can say one in 1-8 to run into a tank. Where in smite it be like a 2-100 to run into it roughly.

(this is not to say there aren't voices by the way but based on how smite is being designed differently voices and complains might be else where again from a design stand point and the options of characters to pick..)

It would be a point to extrapolate on. If there's people complaining about it in smite, there'll definitely be people complaining about it in Ashes. If there's only a tiny minority of complainers in Smite, Ashes would probably have a somewhat decent number (purely because I don't think this has been done in an mmo before).

Also, once again, classes don't matter and don't count, because they do not represent separate skillsets. It would just be "there's a tank", and that's it. And unless Intrepid truly succeed with their "1 of each" design, I'm not even sure how many parties will have tanks in their setups.

But even if Intrepid do succeed, that's still only 1 tank per party. So even in a huge 500v500, that's only 60 tanks for FIVE HUNDRED TARGETS OF ENEMIES. The mass literally doesn't add up to "omg there's 20 damn tanks on me who can all perfectly stagger their taunts in such a way that I'm constantly taunted".

Even 3 tanks on one target would mean that 3 whole-fucking-parties'-worth of tanks are controlling A SINGLE TARGET. All while literally anyone else on the field can attack those tanks' parties with them being defenseless.

I haven't played BDO nearly enough to know if they have any kind of party play or coordination, but I definitely feel like you think that you'd be the center of attention on a field of hundreds, instead of each of those people having their own target. In a party-based game, the party IS the target, so any incoming damage or CC or whatever else is spread across all 8 members, even if it's directed towards only a single character.

You do not exist in a vacuum.

Ludullu

Mag7spy wrote: »

This sounds like a very tab idea mind set, my voice point is strong on it being once every 5-10 seconds even if that taunt lasted one second. This sounds like one of the most unenjoyable effects I've heard of though , please don't take offense to that but that is just how i see it.

And imo that is the whole point of a taunt. It should be distracting, annoying and unpleasant. And your goal would then be to remove it instead of putting up with it.

Also, L2's aggro had a cd of 3 seconds on its effect. That's a tab effect. I adjusted that to a more actiony gameplay. Also also, if you see that you're being targeted by a tank - literally all you'd need to do is go into tab mode. Now your camera is not panning. You're still taunted, but at least you're not being disoriented. The beauty of hybrid combat system

Mag7spy

NiKr wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

ok If the answer is no, what does other people playing smite with their opinions have to do with Camera affecting skills. As in the game their complains would be around smaller fights, non tab target skills (aka a taunt that is not a skill shots), and very minimal chance to encounter that kind of affect besides a characters I can count on one hand?

By default opinion and voices on it are not going to be as loud as there are 8 archetypes in AoC so we can say one in 1-8 to run into a tank. Where in smite it be like a 2-100 to run into it roughly.

(this is not to say there aren't voices by the way but based on how smite is being designed differently voices and complains might be else where again from a design stand point and the options of characters to pick..)

It would be a point to extrapolate on. If there's people complaining about it in smite, there'll definitely be people complaining about it in Ashes. If there's only a tiny minority of complainers in Smite, Ashes would probably have a somewhat decent number (purely because I don't think this has been done in an mmo before).

Also, once again, classes don't matter and don't count, because they do not represent separate skillsets. It would just be "there's a tank", and that's it. And unless Intrepid truly succeed with their "1 of each" design, I'm not even sure how many parties will have tanks in their setups.

But even if Intrepid do succeed, that's still only 1 tank per party. So even in a huge 500v500, that's only 60 tanks for FIVE HUNDRED TARGETS OF ENEMIES. The mass literally doesn't add up to "omg there's 20 damn tanks on me who can all perfectly stagger their taunts in such a way that I'm constantly taunted".

Even 3 tanks on one target would mean that 3 whole-fucking-parties'-worth of tanks are controlling A SINGLE TARGET. All while literally anyone else on the field can attack those tanks' parties with them being defenseless.

I haven't played BDO nearly enough to know if they have any kind of party play or coordination, but I definitely feel like you think that you'd be the center of attention on a field of hundreds, instead of each of those people having their own target. In a party-based game, the party IS the target, so any incoming damage or CC or whatever else is spread across all 8 members, even if it's directed towards only a single character.

You do not exist in a vacuum.

The point is finding information on smite where it is designed different is going to be different than a mmorpg. My point is you already have a small subset to come up with, you aren't going to just find everyone complaining everwhere. Smite is a smaller moba > Other issues palyers complain about > Tons of hero selection > different game balance > amount of people playing as the character out of the 100+ others > people that annoyed > People that complain.

So are getting into such a small set it is going to be harder to find people complaining, as well as the game is designed different. If the skill worked how you had as for an idea that character would be considered one of the best character in the game tank wise. Everyone would be playing it since it be broken. Also people have a means to dodge the skills and such so they can chalk it up to their own skill and improve on it rather than just blame it on the skill itself.

Why i don't see there is a point just looking for people complaining since that can exist for anything and smite isn't big enough to rage over just a taunt on a single character. (the function of it still different than what im talking about. The taunt is a hard cc, what I'm also talking about is a taunt that is a cc that lets you use WASD since it is only controlling your camera and not really forcing you to attack)

https://www.reddit.com/r/Smite/comments/ascj5m/athena_taunt_needs_some_looking_at_and_i_dont/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Smite/comments/zfms1h/most_annoying_cc_in_the_game/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Smite/comments/1fui2d/athenas_taunt_the_most_annoying_thing_ever/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Smite/comments/lxftoy/what_do_you_think_about_athenas_upcoming_taunt/

l only 1 tank per party.

I don't think this is valid (I'm unsure if they said you need one of each archtype, pretty sure they mean a mix in some variety with the different ways you can flex your class, but don't really want to get to into that that is another convo)

Why I don't think this is valid is because wars are not going to be just a one of each arch type and done. Based on the balance of the game, what is strong and what works and what you need. Armies are going to be created based off that. That was the case for NW when I was making our roster, things were not even, we had more bruisers and tanks for wars, healers, and some dmg mages. The weight of classes we had in are rooster was important and not balanced at all.

You think certain people don't get focused in wars even with everything going on? That is a fact that it can happen lol but also besides the point. The argument here I'm seeing if because there isn't a tank per person it isn't as bad. I view things equally it isn't about if it affects 10%-70% but how does that affect the gameplay experience per person. And it affects it badly, even more so if there was a debuff that did it multiple times over a duration.

Based on what you are saying with a single target we are assuming the taunts only affect one target? If we are talking about pve id expect plenty of aggro like skills, single taunts, and aoe taunts. I don't think we should be setting the bar the tank has one taunt and that is enough to handle very hard pve content.

Mag7spy

NiKr wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

This sounds like a very tab idea mind set, my voice point is strong on it being once every 5-10 seconds even if that taunt lasted one second. This sounds like one of the most unenjoyable effects I've heard of though , please don't take offense to that but that is just how i see it.

And imo that is the whole point of a taunt. It should be distracting, annoying and unpleasant. And your goal would then be to remove it instead of putting up with it.

Also, L2's aggro had a cd of 3 seconds on its effect. That's a tab effect. I adjusted that to a more actiony gameplay. Also also, if you see that you're being targeted by a tank - literally all you'd need to do is go into tab mode. Now your camera is not panning. You're still taunted, but at least you're not being disoriented. The beauty of hybrid combat system

So the point is to ruin the action camera so they have to go tab to not deal with it? do you see what the issue is here? I keep saying you are ruining the experience with a skill like that, to decide to not use it shows that is exactly the case.

Again why choose the worse possible way to do it, and not have a more organic way to taunt through smart design?

Ludullu

Mag7spy wrote: »

https://www.reddit.com/r/Smite/comments/ascj5m/athena_taunt_needs_some_looking_at_and_i_dont/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Smite/comments/zfms1h/most_annoying_cc_in_the_game/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Smite/comments/1fui2d/athenas_taunt_the_most_annoying_thing_ever/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Smite/comments/lxftoy/what_do_you_think_about_athenas_upcoming_taunt/

Those seem to mostly complain about the "character being pulled" part, rather than the camera. So even within the niche of a niche of a niche, there doesn't seem to be much complaining about the camera part. I'm sure there must've been at least a few people in the game's history that disliked it, but that's a minority within a minority. And, as you pointed out, we've been talking about a non-char-pull taunt, so Ashes would probably have the same kind of minority complaining about it, while you were trying to argue that the majority would complain.

Mag7spy wrote: »

I don't think this is valid (I'm unsure if they said you need one of each archtype, pretty sure they mean a mix in some variety with the different ways you can flex your class, but don't really want to get to into that that is another convo)

Why I don't think this is valid is because wars are not going to be just a one of each arch type and done. Based on the balance of the game, what is strong and what works and what you need. Armies are going to be created based off that. That was the case for NW when I was making our roster, things were not even, we had more bruisers and tanks for wars, healers, and some dmg mages. The weight of classes we had in are rooster was important and not balanced at all.

And NW barely had a trinity. And had 5-person parties. And had 0 proper supports iirc. While L2 had almost the exact same archetype composition as Ashes will.

Yes, party setups will vary and differ, but tanks would have to be absolutely fucking insanely OP for majority of parties to have 2 tanks in their setup. And imo a CC-based tank that "forces" his enemies to target him (through the usage of said CCs) would be much worse than a tank who can just directly taunt a target but not too much on top of that (outside of obvious protective abilities).

Mag7spy wrote: »

You think certain people don't get focused in wars even with everything going on? That is a fact that it can happen lol but also besides the point. The argument here I'm seeing if because there isn't a tank per person it isn't as bad. I view things equally it isn't about if it affects 10%-70% but how does that affect the gameplay experience per person. And it affects it badly, even more so if there was a debuff that did it multiple times over a duration.

We have no clue how many people would even play in action mode 100% of their time. Out of all of those, we don't know which class would be the most prominent amongst those people and whether that class would be the main target for a tank (let alone several).

And I know that people get focused in wars, but as I said, a single person doesn't matter in a party-based fight. The party is the unit - not its singular members. If only one member of the party is being singled out by several enemy parties - that means that those parties can be attacked by their enemies at uneven ratios. In my experience this usually leads to failures.

But even in that context, as I've said, in my 12 years of playing a mass pvp game - I've never seen someone being super focused by tanks from several parties. At most it'd be 3 members of one party that have aggro abilities. But even then this would usually be an absolute waste of resources, which led to failures, because if 3/9 of your members are trying to control a single enemy - the remaining 8 enemies are fucking your own party.

Mag7spy wrote: »

Based on what you are saying with a single target we are assuming the taunts only affect one target? If we are talking about pve id expect plenty of aggro like skills, single taunts, and aoe taunts. I don't think we should be setting the bar the tank has one taunt and that is enough to handle very hard pve content.

I'm mainly talking about a direct taunt ability. Other skills will probably have aggro values on them for pve, but they wouldn't be "taunts". At least not in pvp.

As for aoes, I've already talked about it. They can be designed and balanced around their pvp applications. Their range could be super small in pvp or their pvp power could be small enough for most classes to resist them with stats (if taunts are based on them), or any other potential solution to your perceived problem with them.

Mag7spy wrote: »

So the point is to ruin the action camera so they have to go tab to not deal with it? do you see what the issue is here? I keep saying you are ruining the experience with a skill like that, to decide to not use it shows that is exactly the case.

Again why choose the worse possible way to do it, and not have a more organic way to taunt through smart design?

Yes, the point is to keep the game a hybrid. Solution to problems should come from the whole game, not just from one place. I'd expect some tab problems to be solved with action camera mode, so it'd be only logical to have action problems that can be solved with tab mode.

Just as I approach this discussion a bit too much from the tab perspective, you seem to approach it a bit too much from the action one. Ashes is not an action game. If anything, it's way closer to a tab one and will quite likely have a ton of problems that would be solved through tab mode.

One of those is Fear, which was mentioned in those reddit threads. What is your opinion on fear in action combat? Cause that is literally taunt but in reverse, except even worse. You completely lose control of your character while it runs away from the enemy. I'd imagine that you hate Fear effects as well, if you dislike camera-moving taunts this much, right?

p.s. I'm going to sleep now so will respond tomorrow.

Mag7spy

Those seem to mostly complain about the "character being pulled" part, rather than the camera. So even within the niche of a niche of a niche, there doesn't seem to be much complaining about the camera part. I'm sure there must've been at least a few people in the game's history that disliked it, but that's a minority within a minority. And, as you pointed out, we've been talking about a non-char-pull taunt, so Ashes would probably have the same kind of minority complaining about it, while you were trying to argue that the majority would complain.

This goes both ways between the camera and the character being pulled and the overall function of it. I feel you are reading into it trying to find a way that people are ok with taunts like this for a mmorpg. If people dislike it they dislike it at the end of the day. Like i said before you aren't getting a majority we are talking about 1 character out of 100 others, information and comments are going to be spread over a lot of things. If you are expecting a ton of complains on a small portion of the game with a older character this does not make a lot of sense.

This is again why you go based on design and how it impact things , if this was a new character it be easier to find information and more view points on it since it be at a point where more people talk about it. As i said before in a mmorpg with less class choices you will run into tanks far more meaning increased issues if it is designed badly.

And NW barely had a trinity. And had 5-person parties. And had 0 proper supports iirc. While L2 had almost the exact same archetype composition as Ashes will.

Yes, party setups will vary and differ, but tanks would have to be absolutely fucking insanely OP for majority of parties to have 2 tanks in their setup. And imo a CC-based tank that "forces" his enemies to target him (through the usage of said CCs) would be much worse than a tank who can just directly taunt a target but not too much on top of that (outside of obvious protective abilities).

Tanks don't need to be op for this, there is going to be body blocking and such, and we don't know how things will play out. NW had a trinity but it doesn't change the types you had in wars regardless with some of the bad design with the game. Mages had big aoe dmg, rng had your single target dmg, brusier with aoe, dps and were chunky, healers with broken levels of healing.

Until the game comes out assuming there isn't going to be more tanks and bruiser types shouldn't be set in stone. Based no my experience front line is pretty important, even more so since it will be hybrid.

I'm mainly talking about a direct taunt ability. Other skills will probably have aggro values on them for pve, but they wouldn't be "taunts". At least not in pvp.

As for aoes, I've already talked about it. They can be designed and balanced around their pvp applications. Their range could be super small in pvp or their pvp power could be small enough for most classes to resist them with stats (if taunts are based on them), or any other potential solution to your perceived problem with them.

So if by chance a skill that is based more on aggro than doing anything else is fine to be useless in pvp?

If we hare having wars with a large mount of peoples the aoe skills are going to be more far effective even more so. (im not even talking about the 250vrs 250) 25v25 or 50v50 is enough to mention how annoying something that would be. Which with a few tanks you are now applying taunt camera affects to an even large amount of people, not making it just a few but now escalating it (which also raises the question if the aoe is smaller what is the point of it in PvE, is it to just aggro two mob together. It sounds like it would be something that needs more range to be effective as a tank skill for pve. This is me assuming the range in close melee rng where you get the aoe taunt).

Yes I'm sure you can get resist for a lot of things, so that doesn't change the effect of the skill when it does work. If the idea is to make it a lot less effective in pvp or most people resist it I'd have to ask why. If the answer has to do how annoying it is for effecting players why have it to begin with why not come up with another solution? Anytime the idea make it not happen often it feels like that is done because how badly it creates as an experience for players which is my point.

Yes, the point is to keep the game a hybrid. Solution to problems should come from the whole game, not just from one place. I'd expect some tab problems to be solved with action camera mode, so it'd be only logical to have action problems that can be solved with tab mode.

Just as I approach this discussion a bit too much from the tab perspective, you seem to approach it a bit too much from the action one. Ashes is not an action game. If anything, it's way closer to a tab one and will quite likely have a ton of problems that would be solved through tab mode.

One of those is Fear, which was mentioned in those reddit threads. What is your opinion on fear in action combat? Cause that is literally taunt but in reverse, except even worse. You completely lose control of your character while it runs away from the enemy. I'd imagine that you hate Fear effects as well, if you dislike camera-moving taunts this much, right?

I believe their point is for people to cater to peoples play styles within reason, not to have them forcefully switching because they have to. As well as keep fluidity of combat like they talked about in the combat showcase with melee wanting to make sure you felt in control.

I've never got the idea they are trying to create problems, they are trying to solve them and of course it is more work having action elements. I don't see why they would add a new problem just to force the sake of taunt working on player to force their camera. In fact we are going moving away from it working the exact same as a pve mob simply because of the strength and removing the ability to actually have fun in things start controlling your game for you (showing a clear connection). So this kind of feels like we will have taunts but kind of not the same because a normal taunt would be not fun to begin with kind of situation.

I'm point out issues with action camera being an actual mechanical issue with WASD movement while not controlling your camera no one as refuted. The answer so far being just use tab instead.

Ashes is hybrid until they say other wise, the argument Ashes has tab is not a justification to make the mechanical elements of action camera worse for the sake of having a taunt working on players in a way the adjust their camera.

It is funny that i can literally look at this the opposite and be like if you get taunted and are forced to retarget something else (on the field with all the people you can barely tell where they are and need to go pixel hunting for lack of better word) you can rely on action combat to attack where you want. Still will feel clunky for tab side of things though which i still feel as a issue with forced retarget.

Also on a note about a lot of L2 features, I want ashes to be ashes it does not need to carbon copy old games or old issues in games, or old concepts that would create issues with modern game design. The last thing i need is people lookat at ashes drawing to much old and reverting back (i dont see this happening ever i only see ashes being more of a modern mmorpg) And people start comparing it to Throne and Liberty, that game should be wake up call to everyone (though im still going to play it since i got nothing else to do, but the game itself is making me break my back to convince people to try it not going to derail into that though).

Fear is very aids as well, fine for pve mobs to have that skill but meh. It it was a ultimate I think id be fine with that on a longer cooldown. Though personally i don't think I'd do mush push back against fear, mostly might be used for griefing as well but should have a competent cooldown

There is a difference though in taunt compared to fear. Taunt forced camera to a player and based on PvE I'm sure it is expected to taunt far more often as well as more skills in relation to having taunt on it. Rather than running away from a target you are forced to look at a target, in the taunt we are talking about it only affects your camera meaning it feels clunky because you have partial control where fear you have 0 control being more akin to a moving hard cc with fear.

And again to extra point this out, the use of fear compared to taunt for CD should almost not be comparable. Meaning you are taunting far more than someone could ever fear. Now if we are talking about a class that can fear as often as they taunt that be very very annoying. Anytime you approach someone you just get feared, it be a very good strat to get people killed to mobs though without going red and actively try to get raids to wipe. But that is another story for another day.

@NiKr

Noaani

So, four points that you bolded.

Mag7spy wrote: »

And also you are not the one to decide on the protection time of a cc

I'm not, no.

But neither are you - Intrepid makes that decision.

As such, we should be assuming that if they add this to the game, they will make this duration what they consider an acceptable amount of time.

Basically, this is only a point ti argue if there is no acceptable amount of time - but there is.

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

Design taunts to not work on an enemy that has a primary tank target. As such, if I am already going after a tank, I am immune to taunts of other tanks.

There are minor alterations to that needed to prevent cheesing the mechanic, but they are minor.

Lets not assume you are going after the tank though

Why would we assume people aren't going after the tank?

If the idea of this is to make players want to go after the tank first, then being taunted on to the tank should tell you to go after the tank.

As for moving, character movement will need to be independent of camera movement. You will need to be able to move your character on one direction while looking in a different direction. As such, there is no reason at all for a change in camera direction (ie, being taunted) to alter the direction in which you are running.

CC sucks

If you are running in a direction holding W down and get taunted, your camera should change direction, but your character should remain running in the same direction it was. Yes, some action games dont allow for your camera and character to be facing different directions, but many do. The spatial awareness needed to he able to control your character and camera as individual entities is a fairly basic MMO skill - even in tab target games.

That said, the only time you realistically should be running and have your camera taunted to a substantially different direction is if you are running away from a fight. If you are actually fighting, the change in direction wont very often be more than 45 degrees. If you are fighting properly by going after the tanks first, you wont ever have a change in direction of your camera.

Noaani

Mag7spy wrote: »

The issue is constant forced camera control and chunkiness, I'm not talking about general cc prevention.

Players will literally have the ability to be permanently immune to having their camera being moved on them. All they need to do is go after the tank first.

Since the idea of the whole thing is to make it so players would chose to go after the tank first (and force those who try not to), it would seem to me that it is having the desired effect.

Mag7spy

Noaani wrote: »

So, four points that you bolded.

Mag7spy wrote: »

And also you are not the one to decide on the protection time of a cc

I'm not, no.

But neither are you - Intrepid makes that decision.

As such, we should be assuming that if they add this to the game, they will make this duration what they consider an acceptable amount of time.

Basically, this is only a point ti argue if there is no acceptable amount of time - but there is.

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

Design taunts to not work on an enemy that has a primary tank target. As such, if I am already going after a tank, I am immune to taunts of other tanks.

There are minor alterations to that needed to prevent cheesing the mechanic, but they are minor.

Lets not assume you are going after the tank though

Why would we assume people aren't going after the tank?

If the idea of this is to make players want to go after the tank first, then being taunted on to the tank should tell you to go after the tank.

As for moving, character movement will need to be independent of camera movement. You will need to be able to move your character on one direction while looking in a different direction. As such, there is no reason at all for a change in camera direction (ie, being taunted) to alter the direction in which you are running.

CC sucks

If you are running in a direction holding W down and get taunted, your camera should change direction, but your character should remain running in the same direction it was. Yes, some action games dont allow for your camera and character to be facing different directions, but many do. The spatial awareness needed to he able to control your character and camera as individual entities is a fairly basic MMO skill - even in tab target games.

That said, the only time you realistically should be running and have your camera taunted to a substantially different direction is if you are running away from a fight. If you are actually fighting, the change in direction wont very often be more than 45 degrees. If you are fighting properly by going after the tanks first, you wont ever have a change in direction of your camera.

Yes they are the one that decides the time, and why i say assuming it is 10 seconds is not correct. WE will know when the game is in a more complete state with their balancing.

That is a possibilities they create custom elements based on archetypes people are fighting. Be it worth it to force a taunt to work in this kind of way that is again ruining player experience, that is debatable.

This doesn't make players go after the tank it becomes a cc that is annoying yes but does not make you force the tank. You deal with that clunky cc (again ruining the experience) than continue what you need to do after the random camera pull. If i have a cleric in front of me at 40% and my camera gets pulled tot he tank, why on earth would I then allow the cleric get away at the end of the effect?

And you are missing the core of the point of me saying you aren't focusing the tank. Being multiple tanks on the field, being camera pulled by a tank 30 meters away in a crowd of people is what I mean. You aren't focusing the tank, we should be here assuming that is the case. I feel you think this idea is a banger but again you are just forcing down a pve mechanic on players int he worse possible way.

As such, there is no reason at all for a change in camera direction (ie, being taunted) to alter the direction in which you are running.

Going to really focus on this point for 2 seconds, this spills of your mind set being tab focused as your preferred play style. That is not how an action camera works.

Quick picture, showing the direction you are moving in based on action camera. Upon looking in a different direction your camera facing direction will be different meaning your directions will be changing. This compounds if you have an effect that lingers (takes .5-1.5 seconds) until your camera full positions on the new target. During that curved duration your movement is going to feel like you are on ice skates as you are not the one in control of the camera. This compounds the further your camera turns from where you are taunted. Effectively you could be going the opposite direction.

All action mmorpgs have this feature I'm pretty certain, and survival games that are third person where you can look around and it doesn't affect your moving position. Though this isn't the case if you are talking about being affected by forced camera control. Though if you advocated for it, it would again compound more clunky feelings to taunt. You are further moving where the player goes and moves even more so by forcing them to run in a set direction. Im most likely not explaining this well enough but it isn't a good thing either. It be like in Pubg if at random points that took effect while you were in a fight and your movement is limited. Moving while the camera is doing this in action camera feels very bad, its mainly for looking back as you run in one direction. This wouldn't work under a taunt effect though either way.

I really don't like this concept you are pushing "you need to go after tanks first" and that is the mind set everyone has to have. All the points seem to step off that, players should do what they want to do, not be shoe horned by bad mechanics that you need to hit a tank first.

Again there are other ways to approach this to create more organic ways to accomplish this that have taunts work in the worse way possible on players. Force camera control is not making anyone only attacking a tank you are giving players a way that will ruin the experience. This feels like a very PvE mind set and not one based on PvP. There are going to be multiple tanks in PvP in large scale, with all kinds of taunts this isn't going to be fun for anyone.

Mag7spy

Noaani wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

The issue is constant forced camera control and chunkiness, I'm not talking about general cc prevention.

Players will literally have the ability to be permanently immune to having their camera being moved on them. All they need to do is go after the tank first.

Since the idea of the whole thing is to make it so players would chose to go after the tank first (and force those who try not to), it would seem to me that it is having the desired effect.

I go about this in my other post, long story short though there isn't just going to be one tank so they wont be immune. The idea of making the game annoying to play to try to force attacks on a tank doesn't sound like good design, and this wont really work you just deal with the annoying part then go amount your business killing who you want to kill.

Ludullu

I don't really have anything to add to the stuff above this.

Mag7spy wrote: »

It is funny that i can literally look at this the opposite and be like if you get taunted and are forced to retarget something else (on the field with all the people you can barely tell where they are and need to go pixel hunting for lack of better word) you can rely on action combat to attack where you want. Still will feel clunky for tab side of things though which i still feel as a issue with forced retarget.

As I said before, the taunt could have additional effect of "you barely do any dmg to other targets while taunted". Obviously this effect could exist even w/o moving your camera, but then you'd have zero clue as to who you're even supposed to attack. I'd prefer if the camera panned towards the one who taunted me and then gave some form of an indicator above that tank's head.

I'm sure you'd say that it could do so w/o panning the camera, but, considering that action mode will give us a much smaller fov of the battlefield, you'd have to move your camera a lot either way when you get taunted. And I'd prefer if the game helped me find my enemy in a big fight. Though I doubt this would really be a problem for me, cause I'll be playing at full tab zoom out most of the time

Mag7spy wrote: »

Also on a note about a lot of L2 features, I want ashes to be ashes it does not need to carbon copy old games or old issues in games, or old concepts that would create issues with modern game design. The last thing i need is people lookat at ashes drawing to much old and reverting back (i dont see this happening ever i only see ashes being more of a modern mmorpg) And people start comparing it to Throne and Liberty, that game should be wake up call to everyone (though im still going to play it since i got nothing else to do, but the game itself is making me break my back to convince people to try it not going to derail into that though).

Except it already has a shitton of stuff from L2, so anyone who knows that game will compare the two. Not like there's that many people who even know L2. Open world pvp is an old design. Death penalties is an old design. Long leveling is an old design. No party finder is an old design. And I'm sure there's a few other old designs that I'm forgetting right now.

Ashes will be called "an old mmo" whether you like it or not. Well, unless they literally change all of that shit

Mag7spy wrote: »

Fear is very aids as well, fine for pve mobs to have that skill but meh. It it was a ultimate I think id be fine with that on a longer cooldown. Though personally i don't think I'd do mush push back against fear, mostly might be used for griefing as well but should have a competent cooldown

There is a difference though in taunt compared to fear. Taunt forced camera to a player and based on PvE I'm sure it is expected to taunt far more often as well as more skills in relation to having taunt on it. Rather than running away from a target you are forced to look at a target, in the taunt we are talking about it only affects your camera meaning it feels clunky because you have partial control where fear you have 0 control being more akin to a moving hard cc with fear.

And again to extra point this out, the use of fear compared to taunt for CD should almost not be comparable. Meaning you are taunting far more than someone could ever fear. Now if we are talking about a class that can fear as often as they taunt that be very very annoying. Anytime you approach someone you just get feared, it be a very good strat to get people killed to mobs though without going red and actively try to get raids to wipe. But that is another story for another day.

And just as fear has to be properly balanced so as to not be seen as op - the taunt will be too. Also, you like to say that you'll be taunted by 20 tanks in all kinds of directions. What about 20 fear-having classes from 20 directions then? I'd assume either mage or bard will have direct fear debuffs. And I'm almost sure that any party will have AT LEAST a mage and a bard. Most likely several of either or even of both. At that point each party will, potentially, have several fear-having classes that can properly stagger their casts and have you running all over the place w/o a single shred of character control.

Tanks do none of that.

But you said that you see fear as aids as well, so I think the main issue here is not that taunt is clunky, but just the fact that you dislike these kinds of mechanics by default. Others don't seem to do that. That's it. So unless Intrepid make a dev discussion about the "you lose control of your character" mechanics (btw @Vaknar please do) - we won't know how many people agree with you on this.

So on this point I don't see any reason to continue this discussion (personally speaking). I'm sure Noaani can entertain you for a few more pages though

Noaani

Mag7spy wrote: »

Quick picture, showing the direction you are moving in based on action camera. Upon looking in a different direction your camera facing direction will be different meaning your directions will be changing.

This is "one way" an action camera can work.

Even in tab target games, this is "one way" the camera works. In fact, it is the way the camera works most of the time in a tab target game. However, it is not the only way it works. In many games, holding the right mouse button down de-syncronizes character and camera movement, with character movement being left with wasd, and camera movement being controlled with the mouse.

Again, being able to move your character in a straight line while looking in many different directions is a key player skill for MMORPOG's. There is no reason this player skill can not be present when a player in is action camera mode.

Sure, your attacks would still go in the direction your camera is facing, but that is the point. If you are taunted, you can only attack the character that taunts you for the duration, hence your camera pointing at them. That is literally the desired function here - however you can still run in what ever direction you want.

I really don't like this concept you are pushing "you need to go after tanks first" and that is the mind set everyone has to have. All the points seem to step off that, players should do what they want to do, not be shoe horned by bad mechanics that you need to hit a tank first.

In most MMO PvP, the meta right now is to go for the healers first. If you don't kill the healers, they will just keep whoever you do go after alive - iobviously.

Players don't really have an option, in most games that is what you need to do to win.

All this suggestion does is shift that to needing to go to the tanks first - which realistically is where it should be.

Now, there are obviously more tricks to it than just alwaysgoing after the tank - you may want to find a way to get a burst DPS class through to take out a healer or two, or perhaps a top performing DPS or a support. The key point there though, is that you can't just go strqaight after those more vulnerable classes, because the tank is essentially excercising zone of control between you and them.

There are going to be multiple tanks in PvP in large scale, with all kinds of taunts this isn't going to be fun for anyone.

Yeah, and if you and your group or raid go after them first, you are all essentially immune to their taunts.

I go about this in my other post, long story short though there isn't just going to be one tank so they wont be immune.

Yeah they would be immune.

Again, if you are targeting a character with tank primary, you shouldn't be able to be taunted off of them. The idea of taunts here is to encourage players to go after tanks first, so if you are going after a tank you shouldn't be able to be taunted off. Any otheir effects on a taunt ability should take hold, just not the actual taunt component.

This being possible is counter to the entire point.

Mag7spy

As I said before, the taunt could have additional effect of "you barely do any dmg to other targets while taunted". Obviously this effect could exist even w/o moving your camera, but then you'd have zero clue as to who you're even supposed to attack. I'd prefer if the camera panned towards the one who taunted me and then gave some form of an indicator above that tank's head.

I'm sure you'd say that it could do so w/o panning the camera, but, considering that action mode will give us a much smaller fov of the battlefield, you'd have to move your camera a lot either way when you get taunted. And I'd prefer if the game helped me find my enemy in a big fight. Though I doubt this would really be a problem for me, cause I'll be playing at full tab zoom out most of the time

This is why I'm saying tab mentality, it is going to be a clunky feature that isn't in the game and put in for no reason. Who taunted you needs to have a very obviously mark you will be able to tell apart in a group even if there is 20 people around. Using action camera you need to be aware of what is going on and look for yourself you don't need someone else to force and dot hat for you.

We are at the point where we are going to say when taunted you do almost no dmg to player players? You are effectively taking the effect from other mmorpgs including swtor and being like raising 30% to 90%. These don't sound like good mechanics to me and I have not seen them exist in other games ever. Mind set you need to attack tank no matter what first does not make sense to me trying to force it in this way that isn't organic. So meta will be people running tanks taunting people and kiting making it so as many people can't do dmg as possible, plus other cc and body blocking. Im sensing things will be not fun for large scale with ideas like this being added

Except it already has a shitton of stuff from L2, so anyone who knows that game will compare the two. Not like there's that many people who even know L2. Open world pvp is an old design. Death penalties is an old design. Long leveling is an old design. No party finder is an old design. And I'm sure there's a few other old designs that I'm forgetting right now.

Ashes will be called "an old mmo" whether you like it or not. Well, unless they literally change all of tha
shit

This is not what i mean by old design, i mean gameplay elements that feel clunky or issues in past game in relation to gameplay around combat as well as pure tab target. Leveling, open world pvp, death penalities are not things I'm talking about with old design.

And just as fear has to be properly balanced so as to not be seen as op - the taunt will be too. Also, you like to say that you'll be taunted by 20 tanks in all kinds of directions. What about 20 fear-having classes from 20 directions then? I'd assume either mage or bard will have direct fear debuffs. And I'm almost sure that any party will have AT LEAST a mage and a bard. Most likely several of either or even of both. At that point each party will, potentially, have several fear-having classes that can properly stagger their casts and have you running all over the place w/o a single shred of character control.

Tanks do none of that.

But you said that you see fear as aids as well, so I think the main issue here is not that taunt is clunky, but just the fact that you dislike these kinds of mechanics by default. Others don't seem to do that. That's it. So unless Intrepid make a dev discussion about the "you lose control of your character" mechanics (btw @Vaknar please do) - we won't know how many people agree with you on this.

So on this point I don't see any reason to continue this discussion (personally speaking). I'm sure Noaani can entertain you for a few more pages though

Here is the thing I explained before but maybe it didn't reach well enough or was missed.

Taunt - Purpose of taunt in pve is to keep aggro which means you need to be prepared for a lot of mobs and to use it constantly having multiple tools to do so (though generally this is better through aggro taunts are a more boring way of approaching it imo). Which means your tuants will be coming back faster, you are going to have long range taunts and you will have aoe taunts to suppose the difficult element of PvE and keeping your team alive as the holy trinity of being a tank. Meaning you will have constant access to your taunt very often. This mind set of forcing a mechanic designed around pve and giving it very powerful effects or very annoying effects means the frequency of it will be extreme on applying it to players.

Fear is not part of the holy trinity, you can compare it to sleep, with that having a longer CD, fear and taunt are not even comparable in the assumption of what will be used more based on the design.

If you think others don't like clunky camera effects and controlling your character (even more so being put into the game for no reason) you are very mistaken. A ton of people would dislike the way you outlined implementing some of these things. My guild as well feels it be extremely cancer.

When it comes to losing character control or forced camera movement people are far more sensitive to that, even more so as they play. I get you are mainly tab focused so that is not a issue for you, but I'm letting you know this is a giant landmine.

@NiKr

Child Item