Average mob TTK

For anyone who doesn't check for Steven "leaks" on discord, this one's an old one, cause I haven't checked in a while myself, but I don't think anyone on the forums mentioned this so far, so here it is

We've mostly seen "party mobs" in locations meant for "4+ sized parties", but even those mobs seemed to have died way quicker than in ~6s. And considering that they were mostly dying to aoe attacks, they seem to be even weaker than solos (unless all aoes are the same in power as solo target abilities).

We've had some discussions about how quick mobs seem to be falling in showcases before, but I don't remember if we've discussed soloable mobs (mostly cause the game is party-leaning, but still).

What yall's opinion on the current direction of pve speed and what would be your preferred speed (both party and solo)?

I personally want smth a bit slower, cause I want base mob population to still be somewhat dangerous. This would tie into the "world is dangerous and there are penalties for dying" design and would mean that people gotta pay attention to the game, rather than watching a show on the second screen while grinding easy mobs.

And that should apply to both solo and party pve, with the party side being prolonged by mob buffs and different player-ability-like effects that make mobs "play in groups" too. We saw a mob use a shield in the latest showcase, but unless I missed another interesting skill - that seems to be the only "harder" part of pve combat. Would definitely like to see more of that kind of stuff.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Dygz

I'm just going to sneak in to say that, theoretically, the Nodes system should provide a decent distribution of challenge ratings for mobs - as Nodes rise and fall.
I would prefer combat vs mobs to last long enough that with mobs my level, I am analyzing strategies and tactics, rather than just quickly running through rote rotations.

HybridSR

NiKr wrote: »

Absolutely perfect, that means if you're properly buffed, you'll slice through mobs.

I can see AoE trains, and a lot of PvP for those AoE train spots, which is obviously fantastic. More fun for everyone.

Noaani

HybridSR wrote: »

NiKr wrote: »

Absolutely perfect, that means if you're properly buffed, you'll slice through mobs.

I can see AoE trains, and a lot of PvP for those AoE train spots, which is obviously fantastic. More fun for everyone.

With a 6 second ttk, you are slicing through the mobs even if you are debuffed.

HybridSR

Noaani wrote: »

With a 6 second ttk, you are slicing through the mobs even if you are debuffed.

True, but considering the amount of damage mobs deal (at least if we go by the showcases), you can't just make an AoE train unless you're going to absolutely blast it very fast, you'd get rekt by the mobs. Even taking on 2 mobs seemed dangerous.

TopWombat

6s seems way too fast to me. I enjoyed classic WoW's ttk - about 12-15 seconds-ish. It gives you a variety of rotation and spec options to kill things differently. It also means it becomes dangerous to pull more than a couple of mobs at a time, depending on your class.

Mainly I just really hope that solo grinding is most efficient when killing 1 or maybe 2 mobs at a time, and doesn't turn into an aoe-fest.

Diamaht

I think dificulty can be tempered by mob damage. Their ability to kill you or swarm you can be what measures risk, instead of long drawn out engagements.

Noaani

HybridSR wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

With a 6 second ttk, you are slicing through the mobs even if you are debuffed.

True, but considering the amount of damage mobs deal (at least if we go by the showcases), you can't just make an AoE train unless you're going to absolutely blast it very fast, you'd get rekt by the mobs. Even taking on 2 mobs seemed dangerous.

Nah, it didn't look that dangerous.

It looked dangerous if you were attacked by another player, but that is about it.

Ludullu

Noaani wrote: »

Nah, it didn't look that dangerous.

It looked dangerous if you were attacked by another player, but that is about it.

More like if you were Steven who was looking at flowers and the sky while his party pulled 6 mobs onto themselves

Any semicoordinated group will obliterate the mobs we've seen so far w/o even getting a single bit of dmg. And that's not even considering buffs from bards.

Noaani

NiKr wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Nah, it didn't look that dangerous.

It looked dangerous if you were attacked by another player, but that is about it.

More like if you were Steven who was looking at flowers and the sky while his party pulled 6 mobs onto themselves

Any semicoordinated group will obliterate the mobs we've seen so far w/o even getting a single bit of dmg. And that's not even considering buffs from bards.

Truthfully, I was trying to write that post in a way where I wasn't saying "Steven is a shit MMORPG player", as I feel I end up saying that after most livestreams (still true though).

Ludullu

Noaani wrote: »

Truthfully, I was trying to write that post in a way where I wasn't saying "Steven is a shit MMORPG player", as I feel I end up saying that after most livestreams (still true though).

I do think he's playing it up for the showcase, but his semi-joke of "my gameplay is representation of what a normal player will be like in Ashes" does have quite a bit of truth in it. Maybe that's also why they keep the game seeming easy, cause if they showed proper difficulty a ton of those normal players would get spooked.

Azherae

Diamaht wrote: »

I think dificulty can be tempered my mob damage. Their ability to kill you or swarm you can be what measures risk, instead of long drawn out engagements.

Mathematically, this almost can't happen.

At-level 'solo' mob vs 2 players.

Dies in 3-4s instead of 6. Does 33% less damage, rewards probably 50% of the exp to each player. Add any synergy, double the CC options.

Unless players are generally so 'incompetent' that 2 people have significant trouble standing in position together compared to one, this is how this goes basically every time.

Then take into account the fact that each of those two players now has the other to 'cover for their downtime' in terms of cooldowns.

The two types of game where this doesn't work are 'high mobility games where enemies have tactical cleave damage and don't flinch' and 'FFXI'.

Unless your answer is ofc 'just immediately buff how much damage they do because they are fighting two people instead of one'.

Noaani

NiKr wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Truthfully, I was trying to write that post in a way where I wasn't saying "Steven is a shit MMORPG player", as I feel I end up saying that after most livestreams (still true though).

I do think he's playing it up for the showcase, but his semi-joke of "my gameplay is representation of what a normal player will be like in Ashes" does have quite a bit of truth in it. Maybe that's also why they keep the game seeming easy, cause if they showed proper difficulty a ton of those normal players would get spooked.

I don't doubt he is playing it up a bit - but he wasn't a good player on Archeage.

Diamaht

Azherae wrote: »

Diamaht wrote: »

I think dificulty can be tempered my mob damage. Their ability to kill you or swarm you can be what measures risk, instead of long drawn out engagements.

Mathematically, this almost can't happen.

At-level 'solo' mob vs 2 players.

Dies in 3-4s instead of 6. Does 33% less damage, rewards probably 50% of the exp to each player. Add any synergy, double the CC options.

Unless players are generally so 'incompetent' that 2 people have significant trouble standing in position together compared to one, this is how this goes basically every time.

Then take into account the fact that each of those two players now has the other to 'cover for their downtime' in terms of cooldowns.

The two types of game where this doesn't work are 'high mobility games where enemies have tactical cleave damage and don't flinch' and 'FFXI'.

Unless your answer is ofc 'just immediately buff how much damage they do because they are fighting two people instead of one'.

But why are you assuming it's one mob at a time? It's rarely just one in any mmo. Its almost always packs.

If its packs of 4 to 6, with some doing heavy damage while others cc or whatever, if they are actually dangerous then you have to make decisions before you enguage. If it's almost never true with one then it's almost always true with 4 to 6.

Azherae

Diamaht wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

Diamaht wrote: »

I think dificulty can be tempered my mob damage. Their ability to kill you or swarm you can be what measures risk, instead of long drawn out engagements.

Mathematically, this almost can't happen.

At-level 'solo' mob vs 2 players.

Dies in 3-4s instead of 6. Does 33% less damage, rewards probably 50% of the exp to each player. Add any synergy, double the CC options.

Unless players are generally so 'incompetent' that 2 people have significant trouble standing in position together compared to one, this is how this goes basically every time.

Then take into account the fact that each of those two players now has the other to 'cover for their downtime' in terms of cooldowns.

The two types of game where this doesn't work are 'high mobility games where enemies have tactical cleave damage and don't flinch' and 'FFXI'.

Unless your answer is ofc 'just immediately buff how much damage they do because they are fighting two people instead of one'.

But why are you assuming it's one mob at a time? It's rarely just one in any mmo. Its almost always packs.

If its packs of 4 to 6, with some doing heavy damage while others cc or whatever, if they are actually dangerous then you have to make decisions before you enguage. If it's almost never true with one then it's almost always true with 4 to 6.

Never mind.

NyceGaming

Time to kill is extremely important imo. The time to kill during the commission showcase seemed great to me for a solo. I also loved that manna maintenance was an issue. I love when each generic mob has to be respected and perceived as a threat similar to how the mob killed Steven with its whirlwind. Nothing needs to be Elden ring difficulty but a ttk a little too high is better than one too low. If you want players to group up like MMOs should encourage, you need high difficulty or at minimum high ttk. Content or adventuring that mayyybe the player could do solo , but the mob is difficult enough or has high enough ttk that it will be tedious without a companion.

Depraved

NiKr wrote: »

For anyone who doesn't check for Steven "leaks" on discord, this one's an old one, cause I haven't checked in a while myself, but I don't think anyone on the forums mentioned this so far, so here it is

We've mostly seen "party mobs" in locations meant for "4+ sized parties", but even those mobs seemed to have died way quicker than in ~6s. And considering that they were mostly dying to aoe attacks, they seem to be even weaker than solos (unless all aoes are the same in power as solo target abilities).

We've had some discussions about how quick mobs seem to be falling in showcases before, but I don't remember if we've discussed soloable mobs (mostly cause the game is party-leaning, but still).

What yall's opinion on the current direction of pve speed and what would be your preferred speed (both party and solo)?

I personally want smth a bit slower, cause I want base mob population to still be somewhat dangerous. This would tie into the "world is dangerous and there are penalties for dying" design and would mean that people gotta pay attention to the game, rather than watching a show on the second screen while grinding easy mobs.

And that should apply to both solo and party pve, with the party side being prolonged by mob buffs and different player-ability-like effects that make mobs "play in groups" too. We saw a mob use a shield in the latest showcase, but unless I missed another interesting skill - that seems to be the only "harder" part of pve combat. Would definitely like to see more of that kind of stuff.

slower doesn't mean more dangerous...the mob could still have weak damage.

edit: I prefer 2-3 skills for solo mobs.

or a good 3-4 seconds of autos

Tryol

Depraved wrote: »

slower doesn't mean more dangerous...the mob could still have weak damage.

edit: I prefer 2-3 skills for solo mobs.

or a good 3-4 seconds of autos

Is is considerably harder to design a challenging encounter when the mob you're designing is restricted to a lifespan of 3-4, or even 6 seconds. They would need to give it very high damage and a really strong skillset to balance for low TTK. I don't think normal mobs should hit you for +10% of your hp each hit, that would be ridiculous.

Having them live longer would give us better balance between hp, damage and skills, leading to a more meaningful and tactical encounter.

Depraved

Tryol wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

slower doesn't mean more dangerous...the mob could still have weak damage.

edit: I prefer 2-3 skills for solo mobs.

or a good 3-4 seconds of autos

Is is considerably harder to design a challenging encounter when the mob you're designing is restricted to a lifespan of 3-4, or even 6 seconds. They would need to give it very high damage and a really strong skillset to balance for low TTK. I don't think normal mobs should hit you for +10% of your hp each hit, that would be ridiculous.

Having them live longer would give us better balance between hp, damage and skills, leading to a more meaningful and tactical encounter.

its not harder. there are mobs in l2 who can 1 shot you, and these are mobs that a mage can kill in 2 hits (2-3 seconds). these are regular, common mobs (not all mobs are like that).

you can have different areas with different mobs. not every single mob in the open needs to be challenging. mobs for party play should be more challenging.

more hp doesn't mean more meaningful encounter. some mobs require certain strategies, even if they die quickly.

also, longer fights mean less conflicts in PVP. why would you fight over a spot if you it takes you a long time to kill a mob, and by the time you finish, another one has already respawned. no reason to fight since everybody will always be busy with 1 mob and have another one there waiting. you would have to considerably reduce mob density then. there are lots of things to consider, not just the time it takes to kill a mob.

Mag7spy

Tryol wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

slower doesn't mean more dangerous...the mob could still have weak damage.

edit: I prefer 2-3 skills for solo mobs.

or a good 3-4 seconds of autos

Is is considerably harder to design a challenging encounter when the mob you're designing is restricted to a lifespan of 3-4, or even 6 seconds. They would need to give it very high damage and a really strong skillset to balance for low TTK. I don't think normal mobs should hit you for +10% of your hp each hit, that would be ridiculous.

Having them live longer would give us better balance between hp, damage and skills, leading to a more meaningful and tactical encounter.

We need to keep in context we are talking about normal trash mobs. Not elites, strong units, special ones, dungeon mobs.

Also id rather mobs hit harder than be sponges, so you are more mindful of using your defensive skills and active dodge / blocking

Noaani

Tryol wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

slower doesn't mean more dangerous...the mob could still have weak damage.

edit: I prefer 2-3 skills for solo mobs.

or a good 3-4 seconds of autos

Is is considerably harder to design a challenging encounter when the mob you're designing is restricted to a lifespan of 3-4, or even 6 seconds. They would need to give it very high damage and a really strong skillset to balance for low TTK. I don't think normal mobs should hit you for +10% of your hp each hit, that would be ridiculous.

Having them live longer would give us better balance between hp, damage and skills, leading to a more meaningful and tactical encounter.

More to the point, if mobs are created in a way where they take 6 or so seconds to die, but where they still deal enough damage to be a risk to an appropriately geared player, skill goes out the window and the outcome of the fight is almost entirely based on luck.

Child Item