This topic only makes me remember Warhammer Online's uncapped aoe pull+snare straight into 2-3 Sorcs killing you and everyone else in that cluster 2-3 seconds later. Contributed to the death of that game sadly.
So you're telling me Warhammer players didn't have good strategy/tactics?
Only counter was to kill the suicider before he could initiate the instant cast pull. This tactic was left unchecked long enough for all the PUG players to quit due to this and the lengthy list of other reasons to stop playing the game.
This topic only makes me remember Warhammer Online's uncapped aoe pull+snare straight into 2-3 Sorcs killing you and everyone else in that cluster 2-3 seconds later. Contributed to the death of that game sadly.
This did not contribute to the death of the game at all, you are mistaken. Warhammer had much bigger problems going on than this. We used to run a group composition similar to what you're describing every now and then with our Alliance, it was cheezy and mostly for trolling/laughs. The only people this worked against were unorganized and unskilled. Any competent guild had no problem fighting against it or could at a minimum hold their own.
This topic only makes me remember Warhammer Online's uncapped aoe pull+snare straight into 2-3 Sorcs killing you and everyone else in that cluster 2-3 seconds later. Contributed to the death of that game sadly.
This did not contribute to the death of the game at all, you are mistaken. Warhammer had much bigger problems going on than this. We used to run a group composition similar to what you're describing every now and then with our Alliance, it was cheezy and mostly for trolling/laughs. The only people this worked against were unorganized and unskilled. Any competent guild had no problem fighting against it or could at a minimum hold their own.
So Warhammer players DON'T have a hole in their head where the sun shines right through it.
Also, I read the discord replies. Are yall talking about smth like channeled aoes that have a long duration? Cause I'd be all for if those had a ramp up, especially if more people go through them, but you didn't have any implication of this being the case.
And on Solvryn's point of Albion (I didn't see that response initially), that shit literally stops at 9+ players that's a fucking start in Ashes. So whichever dmg Albion's boosted aoe does to 9+ players - that'd be the default dmg in Ashes.
And I already explained the physical limitation of having way more people in an aoe.
There was also some talk of Disarray from Albion, but I didn't see any indication of what constitutes "a group" in Albion. Is it "people from the same guild"? Is it "people in literally one group"? "In one raid"? @Solvryn which one is it?
Cause a scaling debuff on ever-bigger groups is fun and all, but it all depends on how the game views a group. Want a low Disarray score? Just split your zerg into several guilds and/or parties. EZ
p.s. I don't use any translators. I've known english for over 20 years, even if it's my second language.
Point of posting Albion scaling is to support the thread because it AoE scaling absolutely can function well when designed properly. Proximity Det also scales up in damage the more people it hits.
AoE damage scaling does work, it prevents one or two people from getting nuked into orbit while doing massive damage to clumped people (there’s no justification for an AoE to hit as hard as a single target ability against one person) There’s versions of it in a few MMORPGs. It’ll work in Ashes when applied to AoEs, it just needs to be designed for this game.
It stops balling and encourages line/formation fighting and actually emphasizes movement and positioning.
I can go into mass depth to how to design it for Ashes too. But most of all as a mechanical function of an AoE it can absolutely punish disorganized play abs mindless zerging, while encouraging organized grouping and rewarding calculated, strategic, and tactical play.
so a grenade will hit harder if it hits more people? XDD i thought one person getting hit by all the shrapnel would receive more damage than several people getting hit by only 1 shrapnel or something like that.
Also, I read the discord replies. Are yall talking about smth like channeled aoes that have a long duration? Cause I'd be all for if those had a ramp up, especially if more people go through them, but you didn't have any implication of this being the case.
And on Solvryn's point of Albion (I didn't see that response initially), that shit literally stops at 9+ players that's a fucking start in Ashes. So whichever dmg Albion's boosted aoe does to 9+ players - that'd be the default dmg in Ashes.
And I already explained the physical limitation of having way more people in an aoe.
There was also some talk of Disarray from Albion, but I didn't see any indication of what constitutes "a group" in Albion. Is it "people from the same guild"? Is it "people in literally one group"? "In one raid"? @Solvryn which one is it?
Cause a scaling debuff on ever-bigger groups is fun and all, but it all depends on how the game views a group. Want a low Disarray score? Just split your zerg into several guilds and/or parties. EZ
p.s. I don't use any translators. I've known english for over 20 years, even if it's my second language.
Point of posting Albion scaling is to support the thread because it AoE scaling absolutely can function well when designed properly. Proximity Det also scales up in damage the more people it hits.
AoE damage scaling does work, it prevents one or two people from getting nuked into orbit while doing massive damage to clumped people (there’s no justification for an AoE to hit as hard as a single target ability against one person) There’s versions of it in a few MMORPGs. It’ll work in Ashes when applied to AoEs, it just needs to be designed for this game.
It stops balling and encourages line/formation fighting and actually emphasizes movement and positioning.
I can go into mass depth to how to design it for Ashes too. But most of all as a mechanical function of an AoE it can absolutely punish disorganized play abs mindless zerging, while encouraging organized grouping and rewarding calculated, strategic, and tactical play.
so a grenade will hit harder if it hits more people? XDD i thought one person getting hit by all the shrapnel would receive more damage than several people getting hit by only 1 shrapnel or something like that.
Sure, if the concussion doesn't kill you.
But whats that have to do with what other IPs have done in order to try to deter Death/Mage ball gameplay?
Also, I read the discord replies. Are yall talking about smth like channeled aoes that have a long duration? Cause I'd be all for if those had a ramp up, especially if more people go through them, but you didn't have any implication of this being the case.
And on Solvryn's point of Albion (I didn't see that response initially), that shit literally stops at 9+ players that's a fucking start in Ashes. So whichever dmg Albion's boosted aoe does to 9+ players - that'd be the default dmg in Ashes.
And I already explained the physical limitation of having way more people in an aoe.
There was also some talk of Disarray from Albion, but I didn't see any indication of what constitutes "a group" in Albion. Is it "people from the same guild"? Is it "people in literally one group"? "In one raid"? @Solvryn which one is it?
Cause a scaling debuff on ever-bigger groups is fun and all, but it all depends on how the game views a group. Want a low Disarray score? Just split your zerg into several guilds and/or parties. EZ
p.s. I don't use any translators. I've known english for over 20 years, even if it's my second language.
Point of posting Albion scaling is to support the thread because it AoE scaling absolutely can function well when designed properly. Proximity Det also scales up in damage the more people it hits.
AoE damage scaling does work, it prevents one or two people from getting nuked into orbit while doing massive damage to clumped people (there’s no justification for an AoE to hit as hard as a single target ability against one person) There’s versions of it in a few MMORPGs. It’ll work in Ashes when applied to AoEs, it just needs to be designed for this game.
It stops balling and encourages line/formation fighting and actually emphasizes movement and positioning.
I can go into mass depth to how to design it for Ashes too. But most of all as a mechanical function of an AoE it can absolutely punish disorganized play abs mindless zerging, while encouraging organized grouping and rewarding calculated, strategic, and tactical play.
so a grenade will hit harder if it hits more people? XDD i thought one person getting hit by all the shrapnel would receive more damage than several people getting hit by only 1 shrapnel or something like that.
Sure, if the concussion doesn't kill you.
But whats that have to do with what other IPs have done in order to try to deter Death/Mage ball gameplay?
no i was just curious because you said an aoe should do more damage to individual targets than to a single target
Also, I read the discord replies. Are yall talking about smth like channeled aoes that have a long duration? Cause I'd be all for if those had a ramp up, especially if more people go through them, but you didn't have any implication of this being the case.
And on Solvryn's point of Albion (I didn't see that response initially), that shit literally stops at 9+ players that's a fucking start in Ashes. So whichever dmg Albion's boosted aoe does to 9+ players - that'd be the default dmg in Ashes.
And I already explained the physical limitation of having way more people in an aoe.
There was also some talk of Disarray from Albion, but I didn't see any indication of what constitutes "a group" in Albion. Is it "people from the same guild"? Is it "people in literally one group"? "In one raid"? @Solvryn which one is it?
Cause a scaling debuff on ever-bigger groups is fun and all, but it all depends on how the game views a group. Want a low Disarray score? Just split your zerg into several guilds and/or parties. EZ
p.s. I don't use any translators. I've known english for over 20 years, even if it's my second language.
Point of posting Albion scaling is to support the thread because it AoE scaling absolutely can function well when designed properly. Proximity Det also scales up in damage the more people it hits.
AoE damage scaling does work, it prevents one or two people from getting nuked into orbit while doing massive damage to clumped people (there’s no justification for an AoE to hit as hard as a single target ability against one person) There’s versions of it in a few MMORPGs. It’ll work in Ashes when applied to AoEs, it just needs to be designed for this game.
It stops balling and encourages line/formation fighting and actually emphasizes movement and positioning.
I can go into mass depth to how to design it for Ashes too. But most of all as a mechanical function of an AoE it can absolutely punish disorganized play abs mindless zerging, while encouraging organized grouping and rewarding calculated, strategic, and tactical play.
so a grenade will hit harder if it hits more people? XDD i thought one person getting hit by all the shrapnel would receive more damage than several people getting hit by only 1 shrapnel or something like that.
Sure, if the concussion doesn't kill you.
But whats that have to do with what other IPs have done in order to try to deter Death/Mage ball gameplay?
no i was just curious because you said an aoe should do more damage to individual targets than to a single target
I went back through the whole thread that I've been supporting in scaling AoE damage and not once did I manage to find the mistype of AoEs should hit a single person harder than a single target ability.
If you contain an explosive it typically will be more destructive than not and what I mean by that is if you take the stuff that's in a grenade not the shell itself and burn it, it wont be nearly as powerful as containing it within a shell.
AoC has something up their sleeve, whether or not it works will be determined...
" We're very cognizant of the fact that we don't want to see zerging be a mechanic that's utilized by guilds to accomplish content or just to steamroll over sieges... There are specific mechanics that we are working on that will be seen through the testing phases that relate to a degree of understanding of certain systems that can't just be overrun with numbers.[6] – Steven Sharif"
It's wait and see for me. There's too many unknowns right now about how Ashes' pvp will turn out. The only thread I've ever started on this forum was about "ball groups." I truly, deeply despise the ball group (zergball, mageball) pvp meta. As a developer, you have to actively deter it or it will more than likely become the meta.
Player collision in Ashes will help stop it to some extent. And I believe, but not sure, that Steven has said there will be no aoe caps - that the cap is essentially however many players can fit inside of an aoe's target area. Those two things will definitely help.
But ultimately we just have to see how the pvp metas start to shape up in Alpha 2. There will be a strong faction of players who are in favor of the zergball meta, and give feedback to steer the game more in that direction. There will be a faction of players who try to steer the game away from it and into a situation where the game has an extremely high skill cap - which if taken too far would have a negative impact on the game as well imo.
As always, balance is probably best. But just to go on record, I definitely align more with the OP's take. Escalating damage aoe mechanics do work. They work so well that sometimes they work too well. And that's what has to be balanced. At the end of the day, I'm in favor of almost anything that breaks up or at least slows down the zergball meta. If it's needed. Which remains to be seen.
It's wait and see for me. There's too many unknowns right now about how Ashes' pvp will turn out. The only thread I've ever started on this forum was about "ball groups." I truly, deeply despise the ball group (zergball, mageball) pvp meta. As a developer, you have to actively deter it or it will more than likely become the meta.
Player collision in Ashes will help stop it to some extent. And I believe, but not sure, that Steven has said there will be no aoe caps - that the cap is essentially however many players can fit inside of an aoe's target area. Those two things will definitely help.
But ultimately we just have to see how the pvp metas start to shape up in Alpha 2. There will be a strong faction of players who are in favor of the zergball meta, and give feedback to steer the game more in that direction. There will be a faction of players who try to steer the game away from it and into a situation where the game has an extremely high skill cap - which if taken too far would have a negative impact on the game as well imo.
As always, balance is probably best. But just to go on record, I definitely align more with the OP's take. Escalating damage aoe mechanics do work. They work so well that sometimes they work too well. And that's what has to be balanced. At the end of the day, I'm in favor of almost anything that breaks up or at least slows down the zergball meta. If it's needed. Which remains to be seen.
just need no capped aoe to wreck the death ball, also should have a very short duration shield agaist aoe from a tank class so in seiges you can push through chokes aswell
just need no capped aoe to wreck the death ball, also should have a very short duration shield agaist aoe from a tank class so in seiges you can push through chokes aswell
I think even this alone, having no target cap on AoE, would be enough to address giving outnumbered players a small extra chance against larger zergs. But id say its at least a minimum. Id still be curious to see the idea of something like bombs/mines that do more damage the more players are in their AoE that players can use to break up zergs/groups that outnumber them though.
TLDR: Dont target cap AoEs + explore the idea of "arcane engineering" bombs that do more damage the more players they hit.
Should this aoe deal 50%HP to all 16 people inside?
How much should it do if there's only 8 people inside? 25%HP?
More? Less? At which point would it be OP? Or do you think that it would never be OP, even if a single person can 3-tap a whole damn party of players?
All of the intelligent players are going to space out into lines and formations and avoid that situation entirely regardless of what ever sensational and hyperbolic reaction we give to it.
It would do its job, punish clumping and encourage tactical and strategic gameplay. Those who can do those things, are rewarded, those who can't die. As they should.
All of the intelligent players are going to space out into lines and formations and avoid that situation entirely regardless of what ever sensational and hyperbolic reaction we give to it.
It would do its job, punish clumping and encourage tactical and strategic gameplay. Those who can do those things, are rewarded, those who can't die. As they should.
This is a great dodge of my question and I'm glad you're that professional in your gameplay and play with people who are as professional as you.
I'm asking for feedback for Intrepid. If they were to implement what the OP and you want - what would yall consider the cutoff point to this feature being OP? Or is there no cutoff?
Because to me, even if it's 25%HP per hit of an aoe - that's OP as fuck. I've never seen a single pvp encounter where people could "move in a perfect line at all times". If you have a video of such players - do post it here, because I'm genuinely curious to see that lvl of play.
What I have seen, even from amazingly good players, is healers being a bit behind their group, while the group itself is in a rough circle that can usually be covered by an aoe. Especially if it's a melee group.
Hell, melee players get absolutely fucking BODIED by this suggestion, because they can never approach a target with several people at a time. This then leads to a mage/ranger meta, which either leads to constant whining from anyone who wants to play melee or to huge rebound balance patches of "ranged dudes are kinda fucked now, but melees can live for a few seconds longer - REJOICE!"
And with Ashes going for more of a party-based combat design, the "they'll just walk in a line" will create such an impossible distance between skilled players and literally everyone else, that the game's pvp will die within months, if not quicker. I'm all for skilled players being stronger than casuals, but I don't support absolute destruction of said casuals.
All of the intelligent players are going to space out into lines and formations and avoid that situation entirely regardless of what ever sensational and hyperbolic reaction we give to it.
It would do its job, punish clumping and encourage tactical and strategic gameplay. Those who can do those things, are rewarded, those who can't die. As they should.
This is a great dodge of my question and I'm glad you're that professional in your gameplay and play with people who are as professional as you.
I'm asking for feedback for Intrepid. If they were to implement what the OP and you want - what would yall consider the cutoff point to this feature being OP? Or is there no cutoff?
Because to me, even if it's 25%HP per hit of an aoe - that's OP as fuck. I've never seen a single pvp encounter where people could "move in a perfect line at all times". If you have a video of such players - do post it here, because I'm genuinely curious to see that lvl of play.
What I have seen, even from amazingly good players, is healers being a bit behind their group, while the group itself is in a rough circle that can usually be covered by an aoe. Especially if it's a melee group.
Hell, melee players get absolutely fucking BODIED by this suggestion, because they can never approach a target with several people at a time. This then leads to a mage/ranger meta, which either leads to constant whining from anyone who wants to play melee or to huge rebound balance patches of "ranged dudes are kinda fucked now, but melees can live for a few seconds longer - REJOICE!"
And with Ashes going for more of a party-based combat design, the "they'll just walk in a line" will create such an impossible distance between skilled players and literally everyone else, that the game's pvp will die within months, if not quicker. I'm all for skilled players being stronger than casuals, but I don't support absolute destruction of said casuals.
I mean yeah, if you make it OP, it will be OP lol. You're asking us to tune numbers on something in a game that the public hasn't tested yet. This is just discussing the *concept*.
"Whats the cut off?"
Idk, thats what testing is for.
Personally, im starting to lean more towards the idea of this anti-zerg mechanic only applying to some kind of siege/engineering item like bombs/grenades, mines, etc smaller groups of players can leverage against larger groups and not even apply this to player abilities (although I think player abilities/aoe shouldn't be target capped, at the very least)
I mean yeah, if you make it OP, it will be OP lol. You're asking us to tune numbers on something in a game that the public hasn't tested yet. This is just discussing the *concept*.
"Whats the cut off?"
Idk, thats what testing is for.
Testing is for finalizing the numbers. I'm asking about the current opinion on what you would consider too much or not enough. We all have our own visions for the game and how it should be balanced. Testing will clash our opinions against each others and Intrepid's.
I keep telling my own opinion, but the other side of this discussion hasn't said a single one of theirs. It's all been vague "just do smth against zerg". We all agree that zerg should be addressed, but I'm trying to get better feedback for Intrepid.
Ashes plans to have 30s+ ttk. I'd imagine that this time will be true for 1v1s or small group pvp (3v3 or smaller). Proper group pvp would most likely go on for 1m++, especially if we have combat rez (which is the case rn iirc).
Having aoes that could deal upwards of 50%HP dmg would reduce that ttk to seconds, and the entire gameplay loop of party pvp would consist of "we're all running around and not trying to fight each other, because that leads to aoes killing us".
Personally, im starting to lean more towards the idea of this anti-zerg mechanic only applying to some kind of siege/engineering item like bombs/grenades, mines, etc smaller groups of players can leverage against larger groups and not even apply this to player abilities (although I think player abilities/aoe shouldn't be target capped)
How do you see them designed? Is it a mine type of thing that you lay on the ground and hope a huge crowd steps over it in just the right way?
Is it a timed thing? A clickable/shootable item that lays on the floor?
How would it not be abused to all fuck by the very zerg you're trying to combat? By default zerg has more people that can lay down these items and blow up those smaller groups sky high several times over.
I'm trying to get some practical usages and applications of your suggestions both from you and Solvryn. This includes the cutoffs on dmg of those applications. Albion has aoes that deal upwards of 50%+HP per hit. ESO has a timed bomb on your character that can pretty much one-shot a party, if the party is not overboosted.
Are those the values you want for Ashes, considering that ESO operates on much smaller scales of fights and Albion has a way faster ttk even outside those aoes. And Albion also doesn't have body collision, so territorial design is not as effective as it could be (dunno if ESO has it or not).
All of the intelligent players are going to space out into lines and formations and avoid that situation entirely regardless of what ever sensational and hyperbolic reaction we give to it.
It would do its job, punish clumping and encourage tactical and strategic gameplay. Those who can do those things, are rewarded, those who can't die. As they should.
I'm asking for feedback for Intrepid. If they were to implement what the OP and you want - what would yall consider the cutoff point to this feature being OP? Or is there no cutoff?
Based off of what? There's not enough data to give you a response.
Because to me, even if it's 25%HP per hit of an aoe - that's OP as fuck. I've never seen a single pvp encounter where people could "move in a perfect line at all times". If you have a video of such players - do post it here, because I'm genuinely curious to see that lvl of play.
Why are you talking like an ability doesn't have a damage type attached to it, like theres not going to be variables that will actually determine the damage each person in an AoE takes.
What I have seen, even from amazingly good players, is healers being a bit behind their group, while the group itself is in a rough circle that can usually be covered by an aoe. Especially if it's a melee group.
This reads like you do not have any strategic or tactical acumen at all to even be able to pull off the most basic maneuvers.
Hell, melee players get absolutely fucking BODIED by this suggestion, because they can never approach a target with several people at a time. This then leads to a mage/ranger meta, which either leads to constant whining from anyone who wants to play melee or to huge rebound balance patches of "ranged dudes are kinda fucked now, but melees can live for a few seconds longer - REJOICE!"
Line and Formation fighting usually breaks down a group into smaller more maneuverable units.
And with Ashes going for more of a party-based combat design, the "they'll just walk in a line" will create such an impossible distance between skilled players and literally everyone else, that the game's pvp will die within months, if not quicker. I'm all for skilled players being stronger than casuals, but I don't support absolute destruction of said casuals.
If casual means going into a PVP battle with no strategic or tactical acumen they're going to lose regardless, just like they lose in every game they play. It's not going to change.
This reads like you do not have any strategic or tactical acumen at all to even be able to pull off the most basic maneuvers.
Line and Formation fighting usually breaks down a group into smaller more maneuverable units.
If this strategy is so obvious and easy to do - please post at least one video from any pvp game where it is used. I'd even take a video where it is used poorly.
I've already admitted that I'm a bad leader and previously stated that I'm bad at all games I play. But show me someone who's good at doing what you're suggesting they do. I've seen countless pvp videos from a dozen games and NOWHERE did anyone use what you're suggesting.
So either your suggestion is a nebulous theoretical, or it is only used irl by trained professionals that have drilled that shit into their brains over years of practice.
p.s. I don't count videos from shooters, because they barely even go above 10v10 (if that).
Zergs and Deathballs where players are just clumped up in one big ball, steamrolling enemies/objectives is a common gripe people have with a lot of pvp in many games. Obviously numerical superiority is a factor in the success of a fight (in addition to tactics, coordination, organization, etc). But just as it works in "real" battle, overly concentrating your forces in a small area can risk those forces being "nuked" all at once.
In the case of an MMO that wants to feature large player driven battles however, for the purpose of balance and gameplay, ideally we would want to find a way that breaks up these zergs and potentially discourages or "punishes" mingless zerging tactics but at the same time, not lending those zergs the same tools to just turn around and use against smaller, possibly more organized groups and just bringing you back to square one.
So what about this (ignore the percentages, theyre just a rough example): AoE's (whether ranged or melee) scale UP in damage when exceeding a certain amount of players hit. Example: 1-8 targets = 100% normal ability damage /// 8-16 targets = 125% ability damage /// 16-32 targets = 150% damage, so on and so forth.
What this would do ultimately is allow for better organized. smaller groups to concentrate their attacks and punish mindless zergs despite being a smaller force. On the flip side, the only way for large raids to AVOID getting their groups nuked like this would be to actively coordinate them and split them up into better organized groups, hence literally acting as a way to "break up" the usual "deathball" we often see in pvp.
And if they cant? Great! They die
Edit: Maybe a better idea would be to have siege equipemnt players can carry, like bombs, mines, (Arcane Engineering?) etc that would work like this. The more targets they hit, the bigger boom they make. Smaller groups can take more advantage of this mechanic better than larger groups would.
I used to lead a zerg ballgroup in Cyrodiil ESO. The idea is nice but as can be taken from ESO does not work for multiple reasons:
Healstacking
Buffstacking
Ballgroup using said AOEs themselves in a coordinated push (multiple of them going off at the same time)
Ballgroups can be dealt with by other players like this:
Ballgroup vs Ballgroup
Coordinated Siege hits
What can be done by Intrepid:
Limit the amount of HoTs that can be stacked on any one target. Single target and aoe single hit spells are fine since these are not an issue/require a cast time or are single target.
Limit the amount of Buffs or Buffstacks that can be on any one target.
Limit the amount of times you can give any one target CC immunity/cleanse.
What you'll find to be the biggest issue with ballgroups is that THEY DON'T DIE.
The ESO team refuses to listen to the playerbase and introduced AOE proccsets to combat the ballgroups instead (spoiler: the ballgroups started using those themselves)
Additionally, I would just like to add that an organzied group in comms should 100% be able to roll over randoms or unorganized zergs.
This reads like you do not have any strategic or tactical acumen at all to even be able to pull off the most basic maneuvers.
Line and Formation fighting usually breaks down a group into smaller more maneuverable units.
If this strategy is so obvious and easy to do - please post at least one video from any pvp game where it is used. I'd even take a video where it is used poorly.
I've already admitted that I'm a bad leader and previously stated that I'm bad at all games I play. But show me someone who's good at doing what you're suggesting they do. I've seen countless pvp videos from a dozen games and NOWHERE did anyone use what you're suggesting.
So either your suggestion is a nebulous theoretical, or it is only used irl by trained professionals that have drilled that shit into their brains over years of practice.
p.s. I don't count videos from shooters, because they barely even go above 10v10 (if that).
I’m not gonna dig for videos that show someone the basics of getting out of the way or learning how to move as a unit.
If you can’t do that then you deserve to die in PvP.
If you don’t have a basic understanding of movement down then you should practice.
Line fighting is a simple rotation where the middle tank is still standing still and you rotate to face left or right or do a 180. That’s a you problem if you don’t know how to PvP.
The same goes for using something as simple as a wedge. You problem or anyone else that can’t do something so simple.
So in other words there is no such video, because the absolute majority of players couldn't give 2 rat asses about this tactic. And the same absolute majority will leave Ashes if instead of several minutes of thrilling mass pvp they have 10 seconds of chucking insanely op aoes at each other.
I'm sure you'll enjoy the rest of the playerbase (all 1% of them) with their high precision movement and line formations.
So in other words there is no such video, because the absolute majority of players couldn't give 2 rat asses about this tactic. And the same absolute majority will leave Ashes if instead of several minutes of thrilling mass pvp they have 10 seconds of chucking insanely op aoes at each other.
I'm sure you'll enjoy the rest of the playerbase (all 1% of them) with their high precision movement and line formations.
You know people are just going to showcase how well they do a basic maneuver and put it online for me to find somewhere, be realistic.
Being hyperbolic and sensational doesn't mean people are going to leave, it means they're going to learn how to press D or A and rotate.
That simple man, that simple. I just taught you "high precision line fighting", press A or D to rotate your character in the right direction.
"Chucking Insanely OP AoEs at each other." Yeah, insanely OP AoEs are going to make it past class and combat tuning into an A2 we didn't get to yet, the thing which all of it is for.
At this point I'm just going to assume you've never experienced AoE scaling or seen it in action to know its a good mechanic that helps prevent ball groups.
You know people are just going to showcase how well they do a basic maneuver and put it online for me to find somewhere, be realistic.
If this was truly such an amazing and working strategy, there'd be several relatively big videos of people using it. I posted an Albion video of 20vs200. They were balled up. I saw an ESO video about literally Ballgroups and how OP they were, even though that bomb ability exists (and another person posted about them as well).
And as I said before, I've seen a shitton of pvp videos from several different games throughout the last decade+ - no one was running in lines or holding some high precision formations.
Being hyperbolic and sensational doesn't mean people are going to leave, it means they're going to learn how to press D or A and rotate.
Except that's not what you seem to be talking about. Keeping up a formation across the entire length of a pvp encounter (unless it's 5 seconds) is way beyond the skill lvl of majority of players. Stepping out/away of a continuous aoe is one thing. Actively moving around so that on-cast-effect aoes don't hit more than 2 of your people is a whole different thing, which no one seems to be doing.
At this point I'm just going to assume you've never experienced AoE scaling or seen it in action to know its a good mechanic that helps prevent ball groups.
Which is my entire fucking point. I'm asking to give me examples of it working and of players working around it.
It doesn't seem to work in ESO and the stuff I saw in Albion was not only OP as fuck (or just seemed that way due to insanely low ttk), but also barely even influenced people's gameplay, because people still just ran around in general clumps.
Every time I ask you to provide proof of what you're saying you just dodge with a "it's so obvious I don't even have to prove anything". Any time I ask of a direct opinion on what the balancing SHOULD be (not what it will be) - neither you nor the OP answer my question.
I've both provided my own opinion on what I'd prefer to see, based on my own experience with plain aoes in huge pvp and on the things I've seen due to this thread, and have linked videos to have a better discussion about this topic. All I've gotten in response is vague shit of "just have smth that counters zerg, duh". Oh, and the constant "you play like shit, don't use tactics and don't know shit" on top of that, but I simply disregard that as useless dodging of the topic.
So in other words there is no such video, because the absolute majority of players couldn't give 2 rat asses about this tactic. And the same absolute majority will leave Ashes if instead of several minutes of thrilling mass pvp they have 10 seconds of chucking insanely op aoes at each other.
I'm sure you'll enjoy the rest of the playerbase (all 1% of them) with their high precision movement and line formations.
You know people are just going to showcase how well they do a basic maneuver and put it online for me to find somewhere, be realistic.
Being hyperbolic and sensational doesn't mean people are going to leave, it means they're going to learn how to press D or A and rotate.
That simple man, that simple. I just taught you "high precision line fighting", press A or D to rotate your character in the right direction.
"Chucking Insanely OP AoEs at each other." Yeah, insanely OP AoEs are going to make it past class and combat tuning into an A2 we didn't get to yet, the thing which all of it is for.
At this point I'm just going to assume you've never experienced AoE scaling or seen it in action to know its a good mechanic that helps prevent ball groups.
if intrepid decides to add something like that for balance reasons, then so be it. like maybe a guild skill since you decided not to invest in increasing your numbers and you got passives to be stronger instead. but im curious to know why some players want something like this?
i get it, if you are in a game where you can stack a million players in a single cell, this mechanic would help. but in a game where you cant do this kind of stacking, it wouldnt because you would have about the same number of players aoeing each other at a given time. even if you have multiple parties fighting multiple parties, they wouldnt be stacked in a very small area. each party would be next to another one fighting the party in front of them, for example.
also, in a game where socializing is important, and not everybody is a winner, why give an advantage to someone who hasnt earned it? you are telling me that after i put in the effort of getting dozen or hundreds of players together, and have them go to the same place to pvp, regardless of individual player quality, a group of 5 people should be able to aoe wipe them just because? they didnt put the same effort as me, why should they be rewarded? thats like rewarding the 5 men guild with a castle instead of the guy who managed to get 250 players to show up. makes no sense.
also this 5 players group could be of worse quality than my zerg, what make you guys think that just because they are less, they are better than everyone in the zerg? they are just pressing a button on people coming in. zero skill needed. why do they automatically deserve the win because they are less?
Comments
Only counter was to kill the suicider before he could initiate the instant cast pull. This tactic was left unchecked long enough for all the PUG players to quit due to this and the lengthy list of other reasons to stop playing the game.
This did not contribute to the death of the game at all, you are mistaken. Warhammer had much bigger problems going on than this. We used to run a group composition similar to what you're describing every now and then with our Alliance, it was cheezy and mostly for trolling/laughs. The only people this worked against were unorganized and unskilled. Any competent guild had no problem fighting against it or could at a minimum hold their own.
So Warhammer players DON'T have a hole in their head where the sun shines right through it.
Thank you sir this is all that needed to be said.
aye me too
so a grenade will hit harder if it hits more people? XDD i thought one person getting hit by all the shrapnel would receive more damage than several people getting hit by only 1 shrapnel or something like that.
Sure, if the concussion doesn't kill you.
But whats that have to do with what other IPs have done in order to try to deter Death/Mage ball gameplay?
no i was just curious because you said an aoe should do more damage to individual targets than to a single target
I went back through the whole thread that I've been supporting in scaling AoE damage and not once did I manage to find the mistype of AoEs should hit a single person harder than a single target ability.
If you contain an explosive it typically will be more destructive than not and what I mean by that is if you take the stuff that's in a grenade not the shell itself and burn it, it wont be nearly as powerful as containing it within a shell.
" We're very cognizant of the fact that we don't want to see zerging be a mechanic that's utilized by guilds to accomplish content or just to steamroll over sieges... There are specific mechanics that we are working on that will be seen through the testing phases that relate to a degree of understanding of certain systems that can't just be overrun with numbers.[6] – Steven Sharif"
oops i just realized i read it too quickly and incorrectly
i thought you meant an aoe hitting one person shouldnt hit as hard as the same aoe hitting more than one person
ah well that happens
Player collision in Ashes will help stop it to some extent. And I believe, but not sure, that Steven has said there will be no aoe caps - that the cap is essentially however many players can fit inside of an aoe's target area. Those two things will definitely help.
But ultimately we just have to see how the pvp metas start to shape up in Alpha 2. There will be a strong faction of players who are in favor of the zergball meta, and give feedback to steer the game more in that direction. There will be a faction of players who try to steer the game away from it and into a situation where the game has an extremely high skill cap - which if taken too far would have a negative impact on the game as well imo.
As always, balance is probably best. But just to go on record, I definitely align more with the OP's take. Escalating damage aoe mechanics do work. They work so well that sometimes they work too well. And that's what has to be balanced. At the end of the day, I'm in favor of almost anything that breaks up or at least slows down the zergball meta. If it's needed. Which remains to be seen.
Well said buddy o7
I think even this alone, having no target cap on AoE, would be enough to address giving outnumbered players a small extra chance against larger zergs. But id say its at least a minimum. Id still be curious to see the idea of something like bombs/mines that do more damage the more players are in their AoE that players can use to break up zergs/groups that outnumber them though.
TLDR: Dont target cap AoEs + explore the idea of "arcane engineering" bombs that do more damage the more players they hit.
Should this aoe deal 50%HP to all 16 people inside?
How much should it do if there's only 8 people inside? 25%HP?
More? Less? At which point would it be OP? Or do you think that it would never be OP, even if a single person can 3-tap a whole damn party of players?
All of the intelligent players are going to space out into lines and formations and avoid that situation entirely regardless of what ever sensational and hyperbolic reaction we give to it.
It would do its job, punish clumping and encourage tactical and strategic gameplay. Those who can do those things, are rewarded, those who can't die. As they should.
I'm asking for feedback for Intrepid. If they were to implement what the OP and you want - what would yall consider the cutoff point to this feature being OP? Or is there no cutoff?
Because to me, even if it's 25%HP per hit of an aoe - that's OP as fuck. I've never seen a single pvp encounter where people could "move in a perfect line at all times". If you have a video of such players - do post it here, because I'm genuinely curious to see that lvl of play.
What I have seen, even from amazingly good players, is healers being a bit behind their group, while the group itself is in a rough circle that can usually be covered by an aoe. Especially if it's a melee group.
Hell, melee players get absolutely fucking BODIED by this suggestion, because they can never approach a target with several people at a time. This then leads to a mage/ranger meta, which either leads to constant whining from anyone who wants to play melee or to huge rebound balance patches of "ranged dudes are kinda fucked now, but melees can live for a few seconds longer - REJOICE!"
And with Ashes going for more of a party-based combat design, the "they'll just walk in a line" will create such an impossible distance between skilled players and literally everyone else, that the game's pvp will die within months, if not quicker. I'm all for skilled players being stronger than casuals, but I don't support absolute destruction of said casuals.
I mean yeah, if you make it OP, it will be OP lol. You're asking us to tune numbers on something in a game that the public hasn't tested yet. This is just discussing the *concept*.
"Whats the cut off?"
Idk, thats what testing is for.
Personally, im starting to lean more towards the idea of this anti-zerg mechanic only applying to some kind of siege/engineering item like bombs/grenades, mines, etc smaller groups of players can leverage against larger groups and not even apply this to player abilities (although I think player abilities/aoe shouldn't be target capped, at the very least)
I keep telling my own opinion, but the other side of this discussion hasn't said a single one of theirs. It's all been vague "just do smth against zerg". We all agree that zerg should be addressed, but I'm trying to get better feedback for Intrepid.
Ashes plans to have 30s+ ttk. I'd imagine that this time will be true for 1v1s or small group pvp (3v3 or smaller). Proper group pvp would most likely go on for 1m++, especially if we have combat rez (which is the case rn iirc).
Having aoes that could deal upwards of 50%HP dmg would reduce that ttk to seconds, and the entire gameplay loop of party pvp would consist of "we're all running around and not trying to fight each other, because that leads to aoes killing us".
How do you see them designed? Is it a mine type of thing that you lay on the ground and hope a huge crowd steps over it in just the right way?
Is it a timed thing? A clickable/shootable item that lays on the floor?
How would it not be abused to all fuck by the very zerg you're trying to combat? By default zerg has more people that can lay down these items and blow up those smaller groups sky high several times over.
I'm trying to get some practical usages and applications of your suggestions both from you and Solvryn. This includes the cutoffs on dmg of those applications. Albion has aoes that deal upwards of 50%+HP per hit. ESO has a timed bomb on your character that can pretty much one-shot a party, if the party is not overboosted.
Are those the values you want for Ashes, considering that ESO operates on much smaller scales of fights and Albion has a way faster ttk even outside those aoes. And Albion also doesn't have body collision, so territorial design is not as effective as it could be (dunno if ESO has it or not).
Based off of what? There's not enough data to give you a response.
Why are you talking like an ability doesn't have a damage type attached to it, like theres not going to be variables that will actually determine the damage each person in an AoE takes.
This reads like you do not have any strategic or tactical acumen at all to even be able to pull off the most basic maneuvers.
Line and Formation fighting usually breaks down a group into smaller more maneuverable units.
If casual means going into a PVP battle with no strategic or tactical acumen they're going to lose regardless, just like they lose in every game they play. It's not going to change.
I've already admitted that I'm a bad leader and previously stated that I'm bad at all games I play. But show me someone who's good at doing what you're suggesting they do. I've seen countless pvp videos from a dozen games and NOWHERE did anyone use what you're suggesting.
So either your suggestion is a nebulous theoretical, or it is only used irl by trained professionals that have drilled that shit into their brains over years of practice.
p.s. I don't count videos from shooters, because they barely even go above 10v10 (if that).
I used to lead a zerg ballgroup in Cyrodiil ESO. The idea is nice but as can be taken from ESO does not work for multiple reasons:
Healstacking
Buffstacking
Ballgroup using said AOEs themselves in a coordinated push (multiple of them going off at the same time)
Ballgroups can be dealt with by other players like this:
Ballgroup vs Ballgroup
Coordinated Siege hits
What can be done by Intrepid:
Limit the amount of HoTs that can be stacked on any one target. Single target and aoe single hit spells are fine since these are not an issue/require a cast time or are single target.
Limit the amount of Buffs or Buffstacks that can be on any one target.
Limit the amount of times you can give any one target CC immunity/cleanse.
What you'll find to be the biggest issue with ballgroups is that THEY DON'T DIE.
The ESO team refuses to listen to the playerbase and introduced AOE proccsets to combat the ballgroups instead (spoiler: the ballgroups started using those themselves)
Additionally, I would just like to add that an organzied group in comms should 100% be able to roll over randoms or unorganized zergs.
Cleric
I’m not gonna dig for videos that show someone the basics of getting out of the way or learning how to move as a unit.
If you can’t do that then you deserve to die in PvP.
If you don’t have a basic understanding of movement down then you should practice.
Line fighting is a simple rotation where the middle tank is still standing still and you rotate to face left or right or do a 180. That’s a you problem if you don’t know how to PvP.
The same goes for using something as simple as a wedge. You problem or anyone else that can’t do something so simple.
It doesn’t even warrant a video.
I'm sure you'll enjoy the rest of the playerbase (all 1% of them) with their high precision movement and line formations.
You know people are just going to showcase how well they do a basic maneuver and put it online for me to find somewhere, be realistic.
Being hyperbolic and sensational doesn't mean people are going to leave, it means they're going to learn how to press D or A and rotate.
That simple man, that simple. I just taught you "high precision line fighting", press A or D to rotate your character in the right direction.
"Chucking Insanely OP AoEs at each other." Yeah, insanely OP AoEs are going to make it past class and combat tuning into an A2 we didn't get to yet, the thing which all of it is for.
At this point I'm just going to assume you've never experienced AoE scaling or seen it in action to know its a good mechanic that helps prevent ball groups.
And as I said before, I've seen a shitton of pvp videos from several different games throughout the last decade+ - no one was running in lines or holding some high precision formations.
Except that's not what you seem to be talking about. Keeping up a formation across the entire length of a pvp encounter (unless it's 5 seconds) is way beyond the skill lvl of majority of players. Stepping out/away of a continuous aoe is one thing. Actively moving around so that on-cast-effect aoes don't hit more than 2 of your people is a whole different thing, which no one seems to be doing.
Which is my entire fucking point. I'm asking to give me examples of it working and of players working around it.
It doesn't seem to work in ESO and the stuff I saw in Albion was not only OP as fuck (or just seemed that way due to insanely low ttk), but also barely even influenced people's gameplay, because people still just ran around in general clumps.
Every time I ask you to provide proof of what you're saying you just dodge with a "it's so obvious I don't even have to prove anything". Any time I ask of a direct opinion on what the balancing SHOULD be (not what it will be) - neither you nor the OP answer my question.
I've both provided my own opinion on what I'd prefer to see, based on my own experience with plain aoes in huge pvp and on the things I've seen due to this thread, and have linked videos to have a better discussion about this topic. All I've gotten in response is vague shit of "just have smth that counters zerg, duh". Oh, and the constant "you play like shit, don't use tactics and don't know shit" on top of that, but I simply disregard that as useless dodging of the topic.
if intrepid decides to add something like that for balance reasons, then so be it. like maybe a guild skill since you decided not to invest in increasing your numbers and you got passives to be stronger instead. but im curious to know why some players want something like this?
i get it, if you are in a game where you can stack a million players in a single cell, this mechanic would help. but in a game where you cant do this kind of stacking, it wouldnt because you would have about the same number of players aoeing each other at a given time. even if you have multiple parties fighting multiple parties, they wouldnt be stacked in a very small area. each party would be next to another one fighting the party in front of them, for example.
also, in a game where socializing is important, and not everybody is a winner, why give an advantage to someone who hasnt earned it? you are telling me that after i put in the effort of getting dozen or hundreds of players together, and have them go to the same place to pvp, regardless of individual player quality, a group of 5 people should be able to aoe wipe them just because? they didnt put the same effort as me, why should they be rewarded? thats like rewarding the 5 men guild with a castle instead of the guy who managed to get 250 players to show up. makes no sense.
also this 5 players group could be of worse quality than my zerg, what make you guys think that just because they are less, they are better than everyone in the zerg? they are just pressing a button on people coming in. zero skill needed. why do they automatically deserve the win because they are less?