NiKr wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Is this because you are talking about 'Playing Ashes primarily in Action Reticle mode' and don't want this effect because it would be troublesome then? I don't think it's unreasonable to have effects that one counters by 'entering Tab Target mode' in a hybrid game. I've brought that up before. Mag disagrees with this position.
Azherae wrote: » Is this because you are talking about 'Playing Ashes primarily in Action Reticle mode' and don't want this effect because it would be troublesome then? I don't think it's unreasonable to have effects that one counters by 'entering Tab Target mode' in a hybrid game.
NiKr wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Greystone's Ultimate heals him and makes him immune and invincible but unable to attack for a bit, but then does AoE damage around him. The almost universal best response is to run away from him as fast as possible before the AoE goes off. You can't hurt him, and most builds certainly do 'fear' getting caught in that AoE unnecessarily. I feel like this is the kind of stuff that Mag wants for tanks (but in reverse of course). Smth that doesn't directly influence the player, but kinda "makes" them take an action that the attacker wants. Mag7spy wrote: » Designing skills to ruin the experience in certain modes should not be a thing. But I feel like they'll inevitably exist, due to the hybrid nature of the system. If only one mode is more optimal to use - those who prefer the other mode will complain that the game is unfair to them. So the only fair thing would be to design the system in a way where people have to use both modes throughout their gameplay.
Azherae wrote: » Greystone's Ultimate heals him and makes him immune and invincible but unable to attack for a bit, but then does AoE damage around him. The almost universal best response is to run away from him as fast as possible before the AoE goes off. You can't hurt him, and most builds certainly do 'fear' getting caught in that AoE unnecessarily.
Mag7spy wrote: » Designing skills to ruin the experience in certain modes should not be a thing.
Mag7spy wrote: » Though there can be inspiration to take from mobas there are some things that are not realistic. Aka having a ult move that chains everyone around you in a large aoe and pulls everyone to one spot and cc 's them. Or giant aoe black hole cc everyone in a large area not letting anyone move, etc.
Azherae wrote: » NiKr wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Is this because you are talking about 'Playing Ashes primarily in Action Reticle mode' and don't want this effect because it would be troublesome then? I don't think it's unreasonable to have effects that one counters by 'entering Tab Target mode' in a hybrid game. I've brought that up before. Mag disagrees with this position. Surely, but I'm actually trying to figure out bases. In an Reticle Camera only game, I would not want this type of Taunt. But because Ashes uses terms that people interpret differently, I can't say for certain yet. There are games where you can't 'turn your character around to see their face without stopping movement' (BDO), games where you can do this anytime and the camera control is separate and constant (Monster Hunter) and games where the game is third person but the reticle is always your character's facing direction (Predecessor). In the first case of game, it depends on implementation, which is where I assume this disconnect comes from. In the second case, as they say 'skill issue'. I am not claiming that the skill should be required or is fun to use, but it is certainly an intentional design choice with a clear reasoning. I think this might be the type we are talking about but Mag7 does not enjoy playing and considers clunky (but I'm working on finding that out now). In the third case, I don't mind based on balance, any taunts such as Countess' ult are explicitly meant to do this, there's no ambiguity, there's no "You expect me to do something executionally to counter this effect" (this isn't true for Predecessor specifically because you can do something executionally, but by the time you've done it, the effect has had its purpose, it wouldn't be 'worth it' as an MMO Taunt.@Mag7spy - please try to bear in mind here that just because I don't find it 'clunky' doesn't mean that I like this or want it implemented. I just realistically know that Steven enjoys certain types of gaming/combat and could easily be completely fine with this implementation instead of relentlessly pursuing some unproven method. Remember that joke about how you definitely support all the core principles except that one you really don't like? "You can solve this problem using our hybrid combat system by switching to Tab Target mode or using your Tab Target skills."
Mag7spy wrote: » Even more so when there are other solutions for taunts....
NiKr wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Even more so when there are other solutions for taunts.... What would you see as a non-OP taunt mechanic? Iirc you mentioned CC-based solutions before, but if you're talking about CC-based taunts in the context of them getting used often and in sizeable aoes (as you keep mentioning) - I'd call those super OP in an mmo where "there's 20 tanks taunting you from all sides".
Mag7spy wrote: » This idea is you guys I don't see the devs reference taunt will control your action camera with a CD and area effect based on tackling challenging pve content. I've seen far more in terms of wanting a bit faster pace and players having control
Mag7spy wrote: » Azherae wrote: » NiKr wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Is this because you are talking about 'Playing Ashes primarily in Action Reticle mode' and don't want this effect because it would be troublesome then? I don't think it's unreasonable to have effects that one counters by 'entering Tab Target mode' in a hybrid game. I've brought that up before. Mag disagrees with this position. Surely, but I'm actually trying to figure out bases. In an Reticle Camera only game, I would not want this type of Taunt. But because Ashes uses terms that people interpret differently, I can't say for certain yet. There are games where you can't 'turn your character around to see their face without stopping movement' (BDO), games where you can do this anytime and the camera control is separate and constant (Monster Hunter) and games where the game is third person but the reticle is always your character's facing direction (Predecessor). In the first case of game, it depends on implementation, which is where I assume this disconnect comes from. In the second case, as they say 'skill issue'. I am not claiming that the skill should be required or is fun to use, but it is certainly an intentional design choice with a clear reasoning. I think this might be the type we are talking about but Mag7 does not enjoy playing and considers clunky (but I'm working on finding that out now). In the third case, I don't mind based on balance, any taunts such as Countess' ult are explicitly meant to do this, there's no ambiguity, there's no "You expect me to do something executionally to counter this effect" (this isn't true for Predecessor specifically because you can do something executionally, but by the time you've done it, the effect has had its purpose, it wouldn't be 'worth it' as an MMO Taunt.@Mag7spy - please try to bear in mind here that just because I don't find it 'clunky' doesn't mean that I like this or want it implemented. I just realistically know that Steven enjoys certain types of gaming/combat and could easily be completely fine with this implementation instead of relentlessly pursuing some unproven method. Remember that joke about how you definitely support all the core principles except that one you really don't like? "You can solve this problem using our hybrid combat system by switching to Tab Target mode or using your Tab Target skills." This idea is you guys I don't see the devs reference taunt will control your action camera with a CD and area effect based on tackling challenging pve content. I've seen far more in terms of wanting a bit faster pace and players having control. So I don't see any reason why this would be added in the game again when there are other options they can do for tanks. I don't see them adding new features not needed that purposely make action or tab worse. There will be things that are more of a benefit I'm sure, but not things that directly reduce the experience of one or the other. If you go mostly action for example with skills and your play style it is effectively nerfing those players for a reason not needed. This is why i said the reserve on the tab element if you were forced into action combat that is going to make player experience feel worse. On both sides it really isn't needed. We can find better ways for taunt affects and zone control. The aoe protection skill tanks have being one of them.
NiKr wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » This idea is you guys I don't see the devs reference taunt will control your action camera with a CD and area effect based on tackling challenging pve content. I've seen far more in terms of wanting a bit faster pace and players having control Which is why I asked about it in the q&a thread, though I doubt they'll pick my question, considering they've done so 2 months in a row already.
Mag7spy wrote: » NiKr wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Even more so when there are other solutions for taunts.... What would you see as a non-OP taunt mechanic? Iirc you mentioned CC-based solutions before, but if you're talking about CC-based taunts in the context of them getting used often and in sizeable aoes (as you keep mentioning) - I'd call those super OP in an mmo where "there's 20 tanks taunting you from all sides". I mentioned one increase tank abilities under taunt effect. So if you are being slowed and do not attack the tank it is increased, when you hit the tank enough times the slow value goes back to normal (this requries tank to be within range of you though) As i mentioned above during tank skill if you are taunted you do further reduce dmg to other players (plus part of that dmg goes to tank). Meaning if they are near tank effect it becomes more effective to hit the tank so you dont deal as much reduced dmg. All these have 0 impact on camera with tab or action. *edit, and ensures for the second one it reads especially well on the battlefield for players with so much going on.
Mag7spy wrote: » All these have 0 impact on camera with tab or action.
Azherae wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Azherae wrote: » NiKr wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Is this because you are talking about 'Playing Ashes primarily in Action Reticle mode' and don't want this effect because it would be troublesome then? I don't think it's unreasonable to have effects that one counters by 'entering Tab Target mode' in a hybrid game. I've brought that up before. Mag disagrees with this position. Surely, but I'm actually trying to figure out bases. In an Reticle Camera only game, I would not want this type of Taunt. But because Ashes uses terms that people interpret differently, I can't say for certain yet. There are games where you can't 'turn your character around to see their face without stopping movement' (BDO), games where you can do this anytime and the camera control is separate and constant (Monster Hunter) and games where the game is third person but the reticle is always your character's facing direction (Predecessor). In the first case of game, it depends on implementation, which is where I assume this disconnect comes from. In the second case, as they say 'skill issue'. I am not claiming that the skill should be required or is fun to use, but it is certainly an intentional design choice with a clear reasoning. I think this might be the type we are talking about but Mag7 does not enjoy playing and considers clunky (but I'm working on finding that out now). In the third case, I don't mind based on balance, any taunts such as Countess' ult are explicitly meant to do this, there's no ambiguity, there's no "You expect me to do something executionally to counter this effect" (this isn't true for Predecessor specifically because you can do something executionally, but by the time you've done it, the effect has had its purpose, it wouldn't be 'worth it' as an MMO Taunt.@Mag7spy - please try to bear in mind here that just because I don't find it 'clunky' doesn't mean that I like this or want it implemented. I just realistically know that Steven enjoys certain types of gaming/combat and could easily be completely fine with this implementation instead of relentlessly pursuing some unproven method. Remember that joke about how you definitely support all the core principles except that one you really don't like? "You can solve this problem using our hybrid combat system by switching to Tab Target mode or using your Tab Target skills." This idea is you guys I don't see the devs reference taunt will control your action camera with a CD and area effect based on tackling challenging pve content. I've seen far more in terms of wanting a bit faster pace and players having control. So I don't see any reason why this would be added in the game again when there are other options they can do for tanks. I don't see them adding new features not needed that purposely make action or tab worse. There will be things that are more of a benefit I'm sure, but not things that directly reduce the experience of one or the other. If you go mostly action for example with skills and your play style it is effectively nerfing those players for a reason not needed. This is why i said the reserve on the tab element if you were forced into action combat that is going to make player experience feel worse. On both sides it really isn't needed. We can find better ways for taunt affects and zone control. The aoe protection skill tanks have being one of them. No, those aren't taunts. They don't affect player behaviour enough. I base this on my studying of games that have these. Only two things do the job of a taunt. One is easy, one is hard for me personally in design, I can't speak for others. Maybe someone more skilled than me will achieve it. I will be glad to see it and study from them when I meet that person. But at the moment, forced Target is the only consistent Taunt I have ever seen, and I prefer to give feedback and have discussions based on the current state of the genre/combat in games. If you believe that AoE or zonal protection is equivalent to a Taunt, there's not much to discuss, though, we'll never agree there.
Mag7spy wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Azherae wrote: » NiKr wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Is this because you are talking about 'Playing Ashes primarily in Action Reticle mode' and don't want this effect because it would be troublesome then? I don't think it's unreasonable to have effects that one counters by 'entering Tab Target mode' in a hybrid game. I've brought that up before. Mag disagrees with this position. Surely, but I'm actually trying to figure out bases. In an Reticle Camera only game, I would not want this type of Taunt. But because Ashes uses terms that people interpret differently, I can't say for certain yet. There are games where you can't 'turn your character around to see their face without stopping movement' (BDO), games where you can do this anytime and the camera control is separate and constant (Monster Hunter) and games where the game is third person but the reticle is always your character's facing direction (Predecessor). In the first case of game, it depends on implementation, which is where I assume this disconnect comes from. In the second case, as they say 'skill issue'. I am not claiming that the skill should be required or is fun to use, but it is certainly an intentional design choice with a clear reasoning. I think this might be the type we are talking about but Mag7 does not enjoy playing and considers clunky (but I'm working on finding that out now). In the third case, I don't mind based on balance, any taunts such as Countess' ult are explicitly meant to do this, there's no ambiguity, there's no "You expect me to do something executionally to counter this effect" (this isn't true for Predecessor specifically because you can do something executionally, but by the time you've done it, the effect has had its purpose, it wouldn't be 'worth it' as an MMO Taunt.@Mag7spy - please try to bear in mind here that just because I don't find it 'clunky' doesn't mean that I like this or want it implemented. I just realistically know that Steven enjoys certain types of gaming/combat and could easily be completely fine with this implementation instead of relentlessly pursuing some unproven method. Remember that joke about how you definitely support all the core principles except that one you really don't like? "You can solve this problem using our hybrid combat system by switching to Tab Target mode or using your Tab Target skills." This idea is you guys I don't see the devs reference taunt will control your action camera with a CD and area effect based on tackling challenging pve content. I've seen far more in terms of wanting a bit faster pace and players having control. So I don't see any reason why this would be added in the game again when there are other options they can do for tanks. I don't see them adding new features not needed that purposely make action or tab worse. There will be things that are more of a benefit I'm sure, but not things that directly reduce the experience of one or the other. If you go mostly action for example with skills and your play style it is effectively nerfing those players for a reason not needed. This is why i said the reserve on the tab element if you were forced into action combat that is going to make player experience feel worse. On both sides it really isn't needed. We can find better ways for taunt affects and zone control. The aoe protection skill tanks have being one of them. No, those aren't taunts. They don't affect player behaviour enough. I base this on my studying of games that have these. Only two things do the job of a taunt. One is easy, one is hard for me personally in design, I can't speak for others. Maybe someone more skilled than me will achieve it. I will be glad to see it and study from them when I meet that person. But at the moment, forced Target is the only consistent Taunt I have ever seen, and I prefer to give feedback and have discussions based on the current state of the genre/combat in games. If you believe that AoE or zonal protection is equivalent to a Taunt, there's not much to discuss, though, we'll never agree there. Well we have different view points on this, I view taunt as a debuff that encroaches you to attack the tank. That can be designed and scaled to different length. Also just because a tank isn't being hit does not mean they aren't doing their job when it comes to PvP. If the tank id debuffing people making them take reduce dmg as a group with their skill, they are protecting people. In PvP if players need to spend more time hitting their allies and realize if they kill the tank they can kill the others faster. That job has been done in the tank being designed to agro players and have them attack them (naturally). So if you don't agree that is taunting I guess that would be you, i view what motives players naturally to do things. If that makes players attack the tank, than I view that as they are being taunted and tank fulling their role in what they need to do and having a impact on the battlefield. Forced taunt(camera control) is a PvE skill, you are simply trying to force it to work in PvP again not in a good way. Effective if you wanted taunt to work the same you could look at people 30 meters away and taunt random people every 15 seconds (or less) messing up the flow of their gameplay. As well as using aoe taunts and kiting people people around. Group would be kiting then all oft hem would be turning their backs when they get aoe taunted having camera control taken from tons of players. I'm sorry butt hat is not fun in a mmorpg, taunt wasn't designed for PvP, it was designed around PvE content. If ashes is going to have hard content and won't use aggro as a means to hold mob attention to a high enough degree. They will have to have taunts of equal power to that content for PvE, hence taunts will be designed around that. Which means they off the bat would be more affective is camera controlling a lot of players not in a good way that reduces the experience. When another approach can be taken.
NiKr wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » All these have 0 impact on camera with tab or action. And unless that dmg reduction is nearing 50++%, I don't think all that many people would even attack the tank. It also does not influence non-dps classes AT ALL. L2's tanks could help against a healer with their aggroes, which was highly appreciated in pvp. And depending on how healers/supports are designed in Ashes, tanks could be valuable against them here as well.
Mag7spy wrote: » I'm sorry butt hat is not fun in a mmorpg, taunt wasn't designed for PvP, it was designed around PvE content.
Azherae wrote: » NiKr could too.
Mag7spy wrote: » NiKr wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » All these have 0 impact on camera with tab or action. And unless that dmg reduction is nearing 50++%, I don't think all that many people would even attack the tank. It also does not influence non-dps classes AT ALL. L2's tanks could help against a healer with their aggroes, which was highly appreciated in pvp. And depending on how healers/supports are designed in Ashes, tanks could be valuable against them here as well. It all depends at the end of the day on balance and how devs want to approach it. There is a lot to consider between skills and itemization on the tank. 1. What does the kill time become on allies with a 50% dmg reduction. 2. What other skills does the tank have that can slow enemies down and zone control the area 3. What are secondary item effects having on the fight 4. What is the healing effectiveness on players with that level of dmg reduction, does it make them impossible to die, what is the healing effectiveness on the tank. 5. What are the movement skills like on the classes and ways to avoid dmg and their own cc 6. What is the kill time vrs players under the buff vrs the time on the tank. Tons more as well but some off the top of my head that have a big impact on the balance and what the numbers will mean. i'm going to focus on point 6 though. Lets say at 50% dmg reduction and low ball and say their kill time is 65% of the tank. If they are protection 4 other members they would have had to kill the tank about 2.5 times over and than fighting the tank as well would be like 3.5*. If they killed the tank first the other members would be a lot more squishy and faster to kill as long as none of them were tanks. So this comes tot heir balance and what they feel is effective and makes sense, they might only need 30-40%, maybe the kill times will be faster and 60% is better. Depends on their balance and their aim and player kill times.
NiKr wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » I'm sorry butt hat is not fun in a mmorpg, taunt wasn't designed for PvP, it was designed around PvE content. I haven't looked into the original Lineage, but L2 had taunt working on people back in 2004. Dunno if other mmos did as well at the time. Azherae wrote: » NiKr could too. Yeah, I just don't really know how at this point. My main point so far is "tank should have same protective tools in both pve and pvp. Taunt is one of those tools". And as for the forced camera move - I already pinged Vaknar with a suggestion to have a dev discussion on those kinds of mechanics (fear is probably the other biggest one of this kind).
Mag7spy wrote: » I can see it in L2 being a lot older tab based game though modern wise that wouldn't hold up people will not like it, even more sow hen you are talking about action camera. Also a taunt designed for hard pve content is different than a pvp focused mmorpg.
Azherae wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » NiKr wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » All these have 0 impact on camera with tab or action. And unless that dmg reduction is nearing 50++%, I don't think all that many people would even attack the tank. It also does not influence non-dps classes AT ALL. L2's tanks could help against a healer with their aggroes, which was highly appreciated in pvp. And depending on how healers/supports are designed in Ashes, tanks could be valuable against them here as well. It all depends at the end of the day on balance and how devs want to approach it. There is a lot to consider between skills and itemization on the tank. 1. What does the kill time become on allies with a 50% dmg reduction. 2. What other skills does the tank have that can slow enemies down and zone control the area 3. What are secondary item effects having on the fight 4. What is the healing effectiveness on players with that level of dmg reduction, does it make them impossible to die, what is the healing effectiveness on the tank. 5. What are the movement skills like on the classes and ways to avoid dmg and their own cc 6. What is the kill time vrs players under the buff vrs the time on the tank. Tons more as well but some off the top of my head that have a big impact on the balance and what the numbers will mean. i'm going to focus on point 6 though. Lets say at 50% dmg reduction and low ball and say their kill time is 65% of the tank. If they are protection 4 other members they would have had to kill the tank about 2.5 times over and than fighting the tank as well would be like 3.5*. If they killed the tank first the other members would be a lot more squishy and faster to kill as long as none of them were tanks. So this comes tot heir balance and what they feel is effective and makes sense, they might only need 30-40%, maybe the kill times will be faster and 60% is better. Depends on their balance and their aim and player kill times. From a design perspective this makes no sense because your goal is always to kill the enemy that is likely to kill you or prevent your objective. Killing the Tank is not priority because usually the Tank is least likely to kill you. This is why people complain about Tank space/strength in PvP, and why only noobs try to kill the Tank still in games without a 'point' to contest like Overwatch. The only way to make this work is the "If you don't respond to my Taunt I will suddenly become the most likely to kill you'' type effect. That effect is very hard to build. There are currently no games where you can have multiple Tanks with an AoE damage reduction that doesn't result in the balance problem. BDO couldn't even manage this when Protected Area was on Mages and had to nerf it. Damage redirection to Tank is good but not a reason to attack the Tank, this does not work even in games with low healing. The thing that 'depends on balance' here is 'which way it fails/which way players play around it'. I would never ask a developer to go through the nightmare of trying to balance a Tauntless Tank with the goal of having people desire to attack them first in an open world game. I'd be setting them up to fail and just giving them the choice of which way they fail in.
