I consider myself a hardcore PvPer, I enjoy games like Mortal Online 2, and even I think people that are happy with a 10s TTK are completely out of touch with how hardcore this will be lol
current TTK literally = just a duo of two stealth Rangers ganking, will obliterate a player before he can even know where they are, making casuals drop hours worth of loot and not even having a chance of fighting back or running away lol thats on the top spectrum of hardcore, MMORPGs with death penalties and loot drop can Not have low TTK, players need a good and big chance of fighting back or running away,
and corruption does not prevent this, nor it shouldnt, because having a 100% guaranteed free kill on a piñata of loot over some corruption that you can run away and grind off... I'll take that all day long, it shouldnt be that easy to kill a player, but well...
Yes balance is always the right way, But ashes will be balanced around group fights. And even if the average 1v1 ttk is 60 sec, you still can get oneshoted in group fight if you get focused. This leads to only 1 logical conclusion - Bigger 1v1 ttk in order to get more interesting group fights
If the ttk is low - there wont be any reason for focusing particular player, because you can solo kill him fast enough. There wont be classes trying to synergize their skills in order to maximize dmg. There wont be tactical retreat, because if you try to get distance from enemy half your team will die.
Also healers will be useless, since they cant react to heal target that dies for less than 1 second. (maybe shields build will be the meta.)
I think there is a reason to focus down players, even with 10-15 sec TTK. In big team fights, healers will be able to react to 10-15 sec, and heal the player. If focused, and it takes 2-3 secs. Kansas is going bye bye.
There will always be some kind of focus, Even in an unorganized group people will tend to attack the front most targets. which will result in always 3-4 players hitting same targets even if there is no shot caller. And with 4 man focusing 1 person i imagine the ttk will be around 2 sec (if average ttk for 1v1 is 10-15), And this is because in 1v1 you still can use some active block to negate some attack or other stuff like this, and if focused by 4 people you wont survive the 2 seconds. So healer will always be useless
Well. Both sides would have mana, CC and escapes, yea? Not just the defender. So the attacker would run out of mana too, so I dont think its a valid argument.
Not running out of mana before your opponent does is a skill in resource management. Using your CCs in a better way and countering escape methods is also a skill.
One L2 class had 2 blinks, a front-facing one and a back-facing one. You could use both of them to move forward, but you had to spin your character and use the back-facing blink asap but also in the best way possible. Those players who could do this in a near-perfect way would not only always outpace other players of the same class, but would also fly around the battlefield way more efficiently, which let them do more dmg while escaping others' dmg.
And again, seeing better uses of the tools that the weaker players has would provide a direct example of what to do (or at least try). Having a small ttk usually just means "use your longest CC and then use your biggest dps ability/atk until the target dies". Not much strategy or variety of encounter approaches. A longer ttk, supported by a good variety of gameplay tools, would lead to a more involved and intricate gameplay.
Well. Both sides would have mana, CC and escapes, yea? Not just the defender. So the attacker would run out of mana too, so I dont think its a valid argument.
Not running out of mana before your opponent does is a skill in resource management. Using your CCs in a better way and countering escape methods is also a skill.
One L2 class had 2 blinks, a front-facing one and a back-facing one. You could use both of them to move forward, but you had to spin your character and use the back-facing blink asap but also in the best way possible. Those players who could do this in a near-perfect way would not only always outpace other players of the same class, but would also fly around the battlefield way more efficiently, which let them do more dmg while escaping others' dmg.
And again, seeing better uses of the tools that the weaker players has would provide a direct example of what to do (or at least try). Having a small ttk usually just means "use your longest CC and then use your biggest dps ability/atk until the target dies". Not much strategy or variety of encounter approaches. A longer ttk, supported by a good variety of gameplay tools, would lead to a more involved and intricate gameplay.
But its good recource management on both sides, no? Everything is skill on both sides.
I consider myself a hardcore PvPer, I enjoy games like Mortal Online 2, and even I think people that are happy with a 10s TTK are completely out of touch with how hardcore this will be lol
current TTK literally = just a duo of two stealth Rangers ganking, will obliterate a player before he can even know where they are, making casuals drop hours worth of loot and not even having a chance of fighting back or running away lol thats on the top spectrum of hardcore, MMORPGs with death penalties and loot drop can Not have low TTK, players need a good and big chance of fighting back or running away,
and corruption does not prevent this, nor it shouldnt, because having a 100% guaranteed free kill on a piñata of loot over some corruption that you can run away and grind off... I'll take that all day long, it shouldnt be that easy to kill a player, but well...
I guess players will soon find out
You may be right. But I do think that the penalty for killing player will be quick severe. Outside wars and the like. You never know what loot you get when you attack people, you can only speculate.
But its good recource management on both sides, no? Everything is skill on both sides.
It always comes down to either class balancing (which will RPS) or small differences in player skill. There's also always some form of rng somewhere, so there's that too.
My main point was that having good mana gameplay would be good for the game, because it would add depth to the combat.
Pretty insulting post ill just say that right off the bat. You are jumping in here literally to be disingenuous and try to twist up the post.
If you are going to respond to a post make sure you understand the context, which the context is the suggestion its not satisfying in a fighting game to win in 15 seconds (to me it is hens the clip). You are heavily trying to read into the post than just take it for what it is.
Also u clearly didn't watch the video talking about someone being almost dead. Next time watch the full video for the full context. Or do i need to spoon feed you every element of the video...
I guess I need to do that. You see in the video there is 2 rounds that happen one is mid way from the first round. Clearly you can see that is above 20 seconds in time. But you see in the last round you can clearly do as you said, and actually you know...count the time its right there. And you can see its 12 seconds into the round. That means under 15 seconds..
Please don't say what i enjoy you don't know me, and you didn't understand the context of the clip to begin with. You were racing to say some non-sense showing you were coming at this to be negative to begin with.
Though ill be happy to have an apology if you weren't trying to be an ass.
I'm not sure if this kinda thing usually works for you with other people? So let's break it down.
I understand the context you were replying to wrt "not satisfying in a fighting game to win in 15 seconds". It's because I understand it, that I replied you seemed to prefer 1-player games disguised as pvp.
It's not called trying to heavily read into a post when you make the most immediate surface level observations available based on what a person is saying and showing. Trying to heavily read into a post would be more like me coming up with a personality profile based on these replies, which I haven't bothered to do. And this is neither here nor there but is there a particular merit to "not reading into things"? In general, it figures one would try to understand where the other person is coming from.
The second round that you so kindly "spoon fed" to me is worse than the first one. I counted 5-6 fumbles from your opponent in that one, as opposed to 3-4 in the first one. Please do correct me if I misjudged what is happening there, I'd love to have my opinion changed. I have no doubts you enjoyed beating on that helpless opponent, and I make no claims otherwise. I also know from experience that dealing damage in most fighting games involves hours of grinding execution, it's an actual skill. It just isn't interactive skill for the most part. When your opponent fumbles, you get closer to a 1-player game in function, which is what I said.
Also, I'm only going to say this once. People can make reasonable judgments/inferences about your internet persona based on what that persona says and shows. Particularly since you said it so explicitly on your own.
___________________________________________________________
For everyone else just trying to get something useful out of this, here it is: people do often enjoy beating their opponent down for 12-15 seconds or however long. That's not the problem. The problem is when people approach design questions based on this, because the second you've done that, you're basically running with the assumption the shoe will never be on the other foot, that you will never have to sit there for 12-15 seconds of failing to do anything relevant before just being dead. Game designers cannot afford not to ask "well what if the situation was reversed, would the person still enjoy that? would they feel like they have agency?"
There are of course people who just want to take turns with their opponent on who gets to combo the other one, but I hope we can all agree here, this isn't very interactive.
There is little difference between a target dummy and someone who fumbles every defensive reaction when it comes to the time it takes to kill them. It doesn't particularly make sense for Intrepid to design around that, does it? Most people imagine themselves putting up at least a reasonable level of fight, which would make more sense to tune TTK around.
Flip that on its head. If the person attacking you can't kill you there is no reward. If you can't be killed, then there is no risk. Now no one is having any fun.
This is a strawman. I don't think you meant to do it, it's probably just a misunderstanding, but it represents a position convenient to argue against, rather than what my actual position is.
To put it very simply, where did I say anything about not being able to kill people?
Then argue against it. Don't say "I could" and then change the topic
Dude, for real, like what? I've reread this interaction multiple times, I also had friends look it over to make sense of it for me, to no avail.
You quoted me about flipping something on it's head (it's unclear what), then proceeded to misrepresent my stance, then told me to... argue against the opinion you think I'm holding or something? And somehow this was me changing the topic? What even?
You're either trolling me, or you're attempting to reply to someone else and quoting my posts by mistake, or this is a very unclear attempt to convey something to me. If it's the last one, I urge you to take a step back, think about what you wanted to say and how you might convey it, and then we'll go from there, alright?
Bow before the Emperor and your lives shall be spared. Refuse to bow and your lives shall be speared.
If a plain buff is viewed as too op for this kind of effect - I'd be totally ok with a "formation"-type deal. So smth like "everyone who's behind the tank in a wide and long cone aoe has this effect on them". This would make tanks move in a certain way around their party, limit their movements in pvp (unless the party is secure in some other way) and would also add more pvp interaction for "forced movement" abilities like the tank's Grapple.
"Allows you to protect party members by placing yourself between them and the enemy."
My Paladin teammate seems to enjoy it. Within the context of current Ashes design, I'm not sure it'd help much, though? Even with a more generous cone. With all the mobility we're seeing, what would it achieve? (I'm genuinely asking)
Bow before the Emperor and your lives shall be spared. Refuse to bow and your lives shall be speared.
Just because most people are average by the way doesn't me they don't want that kind of skill level in the game, and feel their own sense of control and grinding to get better. And enjoy knowing the gameplay offers that to push back against certain tab elements and not be helpless in certain situation waiting for a CD.
Longer ttk serves this exact purpose. Shorter ttk will simply mean that any average player dies to a better player in literal seconds, w/o even a chance to improve. At which point all the average players leave.
You are taking what I'm saying and completely changing the whole point of it. There is no purpose to be talking about here.
My point to tell you is that people enjoy what I'm talking about, just because someone is average doesn't mean they don't like to push towards a higher skill ceiling.
Yes people enjoy cake and pie as well, that isn't what I'm talking about aka you trying to push for 30+ sec kill times lmao.
If a plain buff is viewed as too op for this kind of effect - I'd be totally ok with a "formation"-type deal. So smth like "everyone who's behind the tank in a wide and long cone aoe has this effect on them". This would make tanks move in a certain way around their party, limit their movements in pvp (unless the party is secure in some other way) and would also add more pvp interaction for "forced movement" abilities like the tank's Grapple.
"Allows you to protect party members by placing yourself between them and the enemy."
My Paladin teammate seems to enjoy it. Within the context of current Ashes design, I'm not sure it'd help much, though? Even with a more generous cone. With all the mobility we're seeing, what would it achieve? (I'm genuinely asking)
Last i checked in the tank showcase they had a skill that lets you take a % of dmg from your team if you have your skill up. It redirects to you. Tons of ways that could be augmented as well.
Meaning everyone has a higher TTK for a duration and why i keep mentioning this. Its going to be like wave of higher ttk based on cds and such with your tanks, healers, supports, off supports/tanks, etc. Though there will be a chance to find gaps or catch people off guard.
I've hotkeyed the timer in WoW bgs to validate my sense of TTK for that subjective 'this feels good, that feels bad' range. 20-25s seems to be the 'feel good' range. 15s is awesome when I'm the one killing, but it feels worse when the proportion goes from 1v1 to 1v3 - on both sides of the killing / dying line. 45-60s really does feel like FOREVER.
Just my 2 cents, but that's my comparative baseline for A2.
Meaning everyone has a higher TTK for a duration and why i keep mentioning this. Its going to be like wave of higher ttk based on cds and such with your tanks, healers, supports, off supports/tanks, etc. Though there will be a chance to find gaps or catch people off guard.
"Meaning everyone has a higher TTK" -- Higher than what?
Steven gave several examples of TTK based on different scenarios. Doing that implies they have indeed THOUGHT of different scenarios. Meaning, they are already factored for, defensive skills and all that. So higher than what?
Bow before the Emperor and your lives shall be spared. Refuse to bow and your lives shall be speared.
Meaning everyone has a higher TTK for a duration and why i keep mentioning this. Its going to be like wave of higher ttk based on cds and such with your tanks, healers, supports, off supports/tanks, etc. Though there will be a chance to find gaps or catch people off guard.
"Meaning everyone has a higher TTK" -- Higher than what?
Steven gave several examples of TTK based on different scenarios. Doing that implies they have indeed THOUGHT of different scenarios. Meaning, they are already factored for, defensive skills and all that. So higher than what?
You are the epidemy of being disingenuous at this point. Please go give the quotes where he talks about all these different scenarios. You are talking out of your ass because of your bias against me and can't have a honest conversation.
It is becoming more and more clear to me you didn't watch the AMA and are to busy complaining in your own headspace. There is 0 wording on synergy between classes in GROUP fights, he was talking about average of damn classes. Not how would a fighter or tank be effected by a cleric, tank or other classes working together. And how that effects their TTK.
Ok having a moment more to think while these points are irritating me, pretty much people are trying to suggest Steven said TTK for a dps class is between 10-15 seconds and Steven is account for multiple things in that.
1. Classes supporting them with defese and peels
2. Cleric healing them
3. Classes defensive options
4. Universal defense skill tree (that is not even in a state to show yet)
5. Different team compositions
6. Kiting
By those points you have to only be looking at TTK in group play, meaning TTK in solo is above 15 seconds. Which leads into why are you complaining if its above 15 seconds TTK, but then u make the arguement that if you get focused you die in under one second.
These points you people bring up do not make sense and contradict yourselves. Pretty much saying anything you think will stick but not actually being honest about the whole situation.
No, that link is pretty much Aegis already. And Aegis' aoe also seemed to be tiny.
I'm talking about a huge aoe behind the tank, that's constantly on (i.e. an aura). Well, if, as I said, people think that the 5min buff is too OP.
And I related my idea to Aegis simply due to the similarities in the mechanic. The effect is simply "this gives 50 def if the target received dmg from only a single source, within the last 5s. This gives 100 def, if it was 2 sources. Etc etc scaling up to a shitton of def if a lot of sources of dmg".
In other words, I want to make the attackers spread their damage, instead of all hitting one target. This would still allow for a one-shot kill, but the coordination skill required for this would be insane (or, well, it could be balanced to be insane depending on the dmg check timing values).
Ok having a moment more to think while these points are irritating me, pretty much people are trying to suggest Steven said TTK for a dps class is between 10-15 seconds and Steven is account for multiple things in that.
1. Classes supporting them with defese and peels
2. Cleric healing them
3. Classes defensive options
4. Universal defense skill tree (that is not even in a state to show yet)
5. Different team compositions
6. Kiting
By those points you have to only be looking at TTK in group play, meaning TTK in solo is above 15 seconds. Which leads into why are you complaining if its above 15 seconds TTK, but then u make the arguement that if you get focused you die in under one second.
These points you people bring up do not make sense and contradict yourselves. Pretty much saying anything you think will stick but not actually being honest about the whole situation.
The video clearly refers to single player 1v1 when giving the 10-15. He then talks about group play and target assist killing very quickly.
Yeah, he very clearly refers to each case in those terms, which is what led to the concern at the start of the thread. Once you introduce mismatches in gear levels or group sizes, you die, to quote Steven snapping his fingers, "like that". This is not conducive to exciting counterplay.
Grilled cheese always tastes better when you eat it together!
Meaning everyone has a higher TTK for a duration and why i keep mentioning this. Its going to be like wave of higher ttk based on cds and such with your tanks, healers, supports, off supports/tanks, etc. Though there will be a chance to find gaps or catch people off guard.
"Meaning everyone has a higher TTK" -- Higher than what?
Steven gave several examples of TTK based on different scenarios. Doing that implies they have indeed THOUGHT of different scenarios. Meaning, they are already factored for, defensive skills and all that. So higher than what?
You are the epidemy of being disingenuous at this point. Please go give the quotes where he talks about all these different scenarios. You are talking out of your ass because of your bias against me and can't have a honest conversation.
It is becoming more and more clear to me you didn't watch the AMA and are to busy complaining in your own headspace. There is 0 wording on synergy between classes in GROUP fights, he was talking about average of damn classes. Not how would a fighter or tank be effected by a cleric, tank or other classes working together. And how that effects their TTK.
You ok there Mag?
1) You been getting hung up on this disingenuous thing for a while now, it's becoming a little weird
2) Whatever bias you think I have against you isn't important enough to me. Nothing on this forum is, at the moment
3) You quoted me and I replied with logic. By all means, please feel free to dimantle it. I appreciate the rare instances that happens correctly.
I'm going to try to break this logic down as simply as possible. If there's any point you can't follow, please let me know.
When a game designer presents multiple TTK values, at ANY point in time, like for example 'DPS vs DPS' and 'Tank vs Tank', that means that game designer has thought of those scenarioos individually. It follows from there they considered at least a few different variations, different encounters, classes, compositions etc. If they are considering those things and then giving values, then the classes in those scenarios, with their defining defensive and offensive skills, would be already factored for in the values given.
Bow before the Emperor and your lives shall be spared. Refuse to bow and your lives shall be speared.
No, that link is pretty much Aegis already. And Aegis' aoe also seemed to be tiny.
I'm talking about a huge aoe behind the tank, that's constantly on (i.e. an aura). Well, if, as I said, people think that the 5min buff is too OP.
And I related my idea to Aegis simply due to the similarities in the mechanic. The effect is simply "this gives 50 def if the target received dmg from only a single source, within the last 5s. This gives 100 def, if it was 2 sources. Etc etc scaling up to a shitton of def if a lot of sources of dmg".
In other words, I want to make the attackers spread their damage, instead of all hitting one target. This would still allow for a one-shot kill, but the coordination skill required for this would be insane (or, well, it could be balanced to be insane depending on the dmg check timing values).
Ah, I see. I'm just guessing here, but I think this makes party vs party scenarios with 2 tanks weird/jank. My thinking here is one brings 2 tanks to try and chain Grapple the one giving that buff away from the formation, to somewhere too far off to quickly reposition. 2 tanks are good for this, and they're also good for having a backup defender for when your first one gets grappled away.
So really, what I think this does is make 2 tank the meta for pvp. Maybe even 3 tanks. What are your thoughts on this?
Bow before the Emperor and your lives shall be spared. Refuse to bow and your lives shall be speared.
No, that link is pretty much Aegis already. And Aegis' aoe also seemed to be tiny.
I'm talking about a huge aoe behind the tank, that's constantly on (i.e. an aura). Well, if, as I said, people think that the 5min buff is too OP.
And I related my idea to Aegis simply due to the similarities in the mechanic. The effect is simply "this gives 50 def if the target received dmg from only a single source, within the last 5s. This gives 100 def, if it was 2 sources. Etc etc scaling up to a shitton of def if a lot of sources of dmg".
In other words, I want to make the attackers spread their damage, instead of all hitting one target. This would still allow for a one-shot kill, but the coordination skill required for this would be insane (or, well, it could be balanced to be insane depending on the dmg check timing values).
Ah, I see. I'm just guessing here, but I think this makes party vs party scenarios with 2 tanks weird/jank. My thinking here is one brings 2 tanks to try and chain Grapple the one giving that buff away from the formation, to somewhere too far off to quickly reposition. 2 tanks are good for this, and they're also good for having a backup defender for when your first one gets grappled away.
So really, what I think this does is make 2 tank the meta for pvp. Maybe even 3 tanks. What are your thoughts on this?
who gonna kill? lol
best pvp party will probs have 0 tanks
No, that link is pretty much Aegis already. And Aegis' aoe also seemed to be tiny.
I'm talking about a huge aoe behind the tank, that's constantly on (i.e. an aura). Well, if, as I said, people think that the 5min buff is too OP.
And I related my idea to Aegis simply due to the similarities in the mechanic. The effect is simply "this gives 50 def if the target received dmg from only a single source, within the last 5s. This gives 100 def, if it was 2 sources. Etc etc scaling up to a shitton of def if a lot of sources of dmg".
In other words, I want to make the attackers spread their damage, instead of all hitting one target. This would still allow for a one-shot kill, but the coordination skill required for this would be insane (or, well, it could be balanced to be insane depending on the dmg check timing values).
Ah, I see. I'm just guessing here, but I think this makes party vs party scenarios with 2 tanks weird/jank. My thinking here is one brings 2 tanks to try and chain Grapple the one giving that buff away from the formation, to somewhere too far off to quickly reposition. 2 tanks are good for this, and they're also good for having a backup defender for when your first one gets grappled away.
So really, what I think this does is make 2 tank the meta for pvp. Maybe even 3 tanks. What are your thoughts on this?
who gonna kill? lol
best pvp party will probs have 0 tanks
Have you played a group pvp game where 4-5 DPS out of 8 isn't enough to do the killing (I'm not yet sure if this will be 1 Cleric or 2 Cleric meta) ? Quite fast? Considering the fact Clerics and Tanks themselves are still perfectly capable of dealing damage, just less of it?
Bow before the Emperor and your lives shall be spared. Refuse to bow and your lives shall be speared.
So really, what I think this does is make 2 tank the meta for pvp. Maybe even 3 tanks. What are your thoughts on this?
I'm of the opinion that tank shouldn't do anywhere near good dps, so having 2 tanks decreases your damage output significantly. And if parties think they can still win with lower dps - more power to them.
I'd also expect more forced movement abilities, so it wouldn't just be "tank pulls tank, so you need 2 tanks". This also plays into the body collision design and general movement on the battlefield. A fighter might rush into a tank and push him out of a good positioning. Or mage's black hole might move people away from the tank. Or if backstabs are not just a rogue mechanic - the tank could be way weaker in the back, so attackers might start hitting him in the back, but he can't turn because the defensive aoe is behind him.
All of that stuff would counterbalance (or at least bring more interactions to) this ability.
So really, what I think this does is make 2 tank the meta for pvp. Maybe even 3 tanks. What are your thoughts on this?
I'm of the opinion that tank shouldn't do anywhere near good dps, so having 2 tanks decreases your damage output significantly. And if parties think they can still win with lower dps - more power to them.
I'd also expect more forced movement abilities, so it wouldn't just be "tank pulls tank, so you need 2 tanks". This also plays into the body collision design and general movement on the battlefield. A fighter might rush into a tank and push him out of a good positioning. Or mage's black hole might move people away from the tank. Or if backstabs are not just a rogue mechanic - the tank could be way weaker in the back, so attackers might start hitting him in the back, but he can't turn because the defensive aoe is behind him.
All of that stuff would counterbalance (or at least bring more interactions to) this ability.
My main concern at the moment is I don't really get how current TTK values interact with the abundance of mobility in Ashes. It makes staying in formation less meaningful because of how the damage dealers can easily reposition to where the squishy targets are. Which in turn makes us consider tanks giving party wide buffs like the one you described.
It would be a really odd direction to take balance in from Intrepid imo, because I'd prefer if the position one sits in relative to their tank mattered more, which doesn't work well if people can just zoom across the battlefield, you know what I mean?
Bow before the Emperor and your lives shall be spared. Refuse to bow and your lives shall be speared.
It would be a really odd direction to take balance in from Intrepid imo, because I'd prefer if the position one sits in relative to their tank mattered more, which doesn't work well if people can just zoom across the battlefield, you know what I mean?
Yeah, all these big jumps and dashes really imply to me that tanks will either just be defensive buff bots or cc machines, but nothing more.
And at that point Depraved might be correct in saying that pvp groups won't even have tanks, because why would you need them if your entire party is spread all over the battlefield instead of moving like a single unit.
Ok having a moment more to think while these points are irritating me, pretty much people are trying to suggest Steven said TTK for a dps class is between 10-15 seconds and Steven is account for multiple things in that.
1. Classes supporting them with defese and peels
2. Cleric healing them
3. Classes defensive options
4. Universal defense skill tree (that is not even in a state to show yet)
5. Different team compositions
6. Kiting
By those points you have to only be looking at TTK in group play, meaning TTK in solo is above 15 seconds. Which leads into why are you complaining if its above 15 seconds TTK, but then u make the arguement that if you get focused you die in under one second.
These points you people bring up do not make sense and contradict yourselves. Pretty much saying anything you think will stick but not actually being honest about the whole situation.
The video clearly refers to single player 1v1 when giving the 10-15. He then talks about group play and target assist killing very quickly.
Not sure why you keep getting confused on this.
You can't make the argument they are including team play while saying Steven is talking about 1v1. Your arguments make 0 sense. Its full of bs.
No one is being confused, you all just don't know how make an argument. So you are making points that contradicting yourself.
Meaning everyone has a higher TTK for a duration and why i keep mentioning this. Its going to be like wave of higher ttk based on cds and such with your tanks, healers, supports, off supports/tanks, etc. Though there will be a chance to find gaps or catch people off guard.
"Meaning everyone has a higher TTK" -- Higher than what?
Steven gave several examples of TTK based on different scenarios. Doing that implies they have indeed THOUGHT of different scenarios. Meaning, they are already factored for, defensive skills and all that. So higher than what?
You are the epidemy of being disingenuous at this point. Please go give the quotes where he talks about all these different scenarios. You are talking out of your ass because of your bias against me and can't have a honest conversation.
It is becoming more and more clear to me you didn't watch the AMA and are to busy complaining in your own headspace. There is 0 wording on synergy between classes in GROUP fights, he was talking about average of damn classes. Not how would a fighter or tank be effected by a cleric, tank or other classes working together. And how that effects their TTK.
You ok there Mag?
1) You been getting hung up on this disingenuous thing for a while now, it's becoming a little weird
2) Whatever bias you think I have against you isn't important enough to me. Nothing on this forum is, at the moment
3) You quoted me and I replied with logic. By all means, please feel free to dimantle it. I appreciate the rare instances that happens correctly.
I'm going to try to break this logic down as simply as possible. If there's any point you can't follow, please let me know.
When a game designer presents multiple TTK values, at ANY point in time, like for example 'DPS vs DPS' and 'Tank vs Tank', that means that game designer has thought of those scenarioos individually. It follows from there they considered at least a few different variations, different encounters, classes, compositions etc. If they are considering those things and then giving values, then the classes in those scenarios, with their defining defensive and offensive skills, would be already factored for in the values given.
You are making assumptions your entire premises falls apart unless they are doing what you think. You can have multiple view points on 1v1 ttk and group play ttk.
You are riding on some assumption everything is generic so all ttk will be the same no matter the group composition or type of content. This is false.
Comments
current TTK literally = just a duo of two stealth Rangers ganking, will obliterate a player before he can even know where they are, making casuals drop hours worth of loot and not even having a chance of fighting back or running away lol thats on the top spectrum of hardcore, MMORPGs with death penalties and loot drop can Not have low TTK, players need a good and big chance of fighting back or running away,
and corruption does not prevent this, nor it shouldnt, because having a 100% guaranteed free kill on a piñata of loot over some corruption that you can run away and grind off... I'll take that all day long, it shouldnt be that easy to kill a player, but well...
I guess players will soon find out
There will always be some kind of focus, Even in an unorganized group people will tend to attack the front most targets. which will result in always 3-4 players hitting same targets even if there is no shot caller. And with 4 man focusing 1 person i imagine the ttk will be around 2 sec (if average ttk for 1v1 is 10-15), And this is because in 1v1 you still can use some active block to negate some attack or other stuff like this, and if focused by 4 people you wont survive the 2 seconds. So healer will always be useless
One L2 class had 2 blinks, a front-facing one and a back-facing one. You could use both of them to move forward, but you had to spin your character and use the back-facing blink asap but also in the best way possible. Those players who could do this in a near-perfect way would not only always outpace other players of the same class, but would also fly around the battlefield way more efficiently, which let them do more dmg while escaping others' dmg.
And again, seeing better uses of the tools that the weaker players has would provide a direct example of what to do (or at least try). Having a small ttk usually just means "use your longest CC and then use your biggest dps ability/atk until the target dies". Not much strategy or variety of encounter approaches. A longer ttk, supported by a good variety of gameplay tools, would lead to a more involved and intricate gameplay.
But its good recource management on both sides, no? Everything is skill on both sides.
You may be right. But I do think that the penalty for killing player will be quick severe. Outside wars and the like. You never know what loot you get when you attack people, you can only speculate.
My main point was that having good mana gameplay would be good for the game, because it would add depth to the combat.
Dude, for real, like what? I've reread this interaction multiple times, I also had friends look it over to make sense of it for me, to no avail.
You quoted me about flipping something on it's head (it's unclear what), then proceeded to misrepresent my stance, then told me to... argue against the opinion you think I'm holding or something? And somehow this was me changing the topic? What even?
You're either trolling me, or you're attempting to reply to someone else and quoting my posts by mistake, or this is a very unclear attempt to convey something to me. If it's the last one, I urge you to take a step back, think about what you wanted to say and how you might convey it, and then we'll go from there, alright?
Do you perhaps mean something like this?
https://ffxiclopedia.fandom.com/wiki/Cover
"Allows you to protect party members by placing yourself between them and the enemy."
My Paladin teammate seems to enjoy it. Within the context of current Ashes design, I'm not sure it'd help much, though? Even with a more generous cone. With all the mobility we're seeing, what would it achieve? (I'm genuinely asking)
noooo nikr, I refuse to believe ur an f1 spammer T_T
You are taking what I'm saying and completely changing the whole point of it. There is no purpose to be talking about here.
My point to tell you is that people enjoy what I'm talking about, just because someone is average doesn't mean they don't like to push towards a higher skill ceiling.
Yes people enjoy cake and pie as well, that isn't what I'm talking about aka you trying to push for 30+ sec kill times lmao.
Last i checked in the tank showcase they had a skill that lets you take a % of dmg from your team if you have your skill up. It redirects to you. Tons of ways that could be augmented as well.
Meaning everyone has a higher TTK for a duration and why i keep mentioning this. Its going to be like wave of higher ttk based on cds and such with your tanks, healers, supports, off supports/tanks, etc. Though there will be a chance to find gaps or catch people off guard.
Just my 2 cents, but that's my comparative baseline for A2.
"Meaning everyone has a higher TTK" -- Higher than what?
Steven gave several examples of TTK based on different scenarios. Doing that implies they have indeed THOUGHT of different scenarios. Meaning, they are already factored for, defensive skills and all that. So higher than what?
You are the epidemy of being disingenuous at this point. Please go give the quotes where he talks about all these different scenarios. You are talking out of your ass because of your bias against me and can't have a honest conversation.
It is becoming more and more clear to me you didn't watch the AMA and are to busy complaining in your own headspace. There is 0 wording on synergy between classes in GROUP fights, he was talking about average of damn classes. Not how would a fighter or tank be effected by a cleric, tank or other classes working together. And how that effects their TTK.
i dont see any problem..
for me ttk is too damn fast
1. Classes supporting them with defese and peels
2. Cleric healing them
3. Classes defensive options
4. Universal defense skill tree (that is not even in a state to show yet)
5. Different team compositions
6. Kiting
By those points you have to only be looking at TTK in group play, meaning TTK in solo is above 15 seconds. Which leads into why are you complaining if its above 15 seconds TTK, but then u make the arguement that if you get focused you die in under one second.
These points you people bring up do not make sense and contradict yourselves. Pretty much saying anything you think will stick but not actually being honest about the whole situation.
I'm talking about a huge aoe behind the tank, that's constantly on (i.e. an aura). Well, if, as I said, people think that the 5min buff is too OP.
And I related my idea to Aegis simply due to the similarities in the mechanic. The effect is simply "this gives 50 def if the target received dmg from only a single source, within the last 5s. This gives 100 def, if it was 2 sources. Etc etc scaling up to a shitton of def if a lot of sources of dmg".
In other words, I want to make the attackers spread their damage, instead of all hitting one target. This would still allow for a one-shot kill, but the coordination skill required for this would be insane (or, well, it could be balanced to be insane depending on the dmg check timing values).
The video clearly refers to single player 1v1 when giving the 10-15. He then talks about group play and target assist killing very quickly.
Not sure why you keep getting confused on this.
You ok there Mag?
1) You been getting hung up on this disingenuous thing for a while now, it's becoming a little weird
2) Whatever bias you think I have against you isn't important enough to me. Nothing on this forum is, at the moment
3) You quoted me and I replied with logic. By all means, please feel free to dimantle it. I appreciate the rare instances that happens correctly.
I'm going to try to break this logic down as simply as possible. If there's any point you can't follow, please let me know.
When a game designer presents multiple TTK values, at ANY point in time, like for example 'DPS vs DPS' and 'Tank vs Tank', that means that game designer has thought of those scenarioos individually. It follows from there they considered at least a few different variations, different encounters, classes, compositions etc. If they are considering those things and then giving values, then the classes in those scenarios, with their defining defensive and offensive skills, would be already factored for in the values given.
Ah, I see. I'm just guessing here, but I think this makes party vs party scenarios with 2 tanks weird/jank. My thinking here is one brings 2 tanks to try and chain Grapple the one giving that buff away from the formation, to somewhere too far off to quickly reposition. 2 tanks are good for this, and they're also good for having a backup defender for when your first one gets grappled away.
So really, what I think this does is make 2 tank the meta for pvp. Maybe even 3 tanks. What are your thoughts on this?
who gonna kill? lol
best pvp party will probs have 0 tanks
Have you played a group pvp game where 4-5 DPS out of 8 isn't enough to do the killing (I'm not yet sure if this will be 1 Cleric or 2 Cleric meta) ? Quite fast? Considering the fact Clerics and Tanks themselves are still perfectly capable of dealing damage, just less of it?
I'd also expect more forced movement abilities, so it wouldn't just be "tank pulls tank, so you need 2 tanks". This also plays into the body collision design and general movement on the battlefield. A fighter might rush into a tank and push him out of a good positioning. Or mage's black hole might move people away from the tank. Or if backstabs are not just a rogue mechanic - the tank could be way weaker in the back, so attackers might start hitting him in the back, but he can't turn because the defensive aoe is behind him.
All of that stuff would counterbalance (or at least bring more interactions to) this ability.
My main concern at the moment is I don't really get how current TTK values interact with the abundance of mobility in Ashes. It makes staying in formation less meaningful because of how the damage dealers can easily reposition to where the squishy targets are. Which in turn makes us consider tanks giving party wide buffs like the one you described.
It would be a really odd direction to take balance in from Intrepid imo, because I'd prefer if the position one sits in relative to their tank mattered more, which doesn't work well if people can just zoom across the battlefield, you know what I mean?
And at that point Depraved might be correct in saying that pvp groups won't even have tanks, because why would you need them if your entire party is spread all over the battlefield instead of moving like a single unit.
You can't make the argument they are including team play while saying Steven is talking about 1v1. Your arguments make 0 sense. Its full of bs.
No one is being confused, you all just don't know how make an argument. So you are making points that contradicting yourself.
You are making assumptions your entire premises falls apart unless they are doing what you think. You can have multiple view points on 1v1 ttk and group play ttk.
You are riding on some assumption everything is generic so all ttk will be the same no matter the group composition or type of content. This is false.