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.
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.
Mag, just please go watch the clip again. He literally talks about "dps vs dps", "healer/tank vs healer/tank" and then talks about group pvp and says "targets can be killed *snap* like that".
So when we draw a line between "a dps character can be killed in 10s" and "in a group vs group situation a target can die in a second" (snap signifies that second) - it's not difficult to come to a conclusion that several situations have been considered when explaining those encounters, because one directly relates to the other.
Depraved chose to believe that Steven was talking about an 8+++ size group vs a singular target. You are now choosing to think that Steven didn't even talk about group pvp.
Well, I want to say "realizing that people are confused is also a form of valuable feedback for Intrepid", but that would involve making assumptions, because I don't know which segment of the audience Mag represents. Maybe Intrepid is inclined to talk about this in the future, too.
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
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?
3 tanks. you definetely want at least 1 cleric for the heals 1 bard for the buffs. that leaves 3 dps. will probably need summoner to support too or debuff, depending what it does, and chances are you will need 2 clerics in this game for PVP (that's more likely than needing 3 tanks). we don't know for sure. lets say 3 dps. maybe if you pull a squishy, you can kill him fast, who knows.
if you start adding more tanks, who will you remove from the party?
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
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.
In Ashes that should not be a valid concept because every Class in that Group with 2 Tanks could be an x/Rogue equipped with plenty of DPS Augments.
Or the 2 Tanks could be adding DPS Augments from Social Orgs or Religions, etc.
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.
Mag, just please go watch the clip again. He literally talks about "dps vs dps", "healer/tank vs healer/tank" and then talks about group pvp and says "targets can be killed *snap* like that".
So when we draw a line between "a dps character can be killed in 10s" and "in a group vs group situation a target can die in a second" (snap signifies that second) - it's not difficult to come to a conclusion that several situations have been considered when explaining those encounters, because one directly relates to the other.
Depraved chose to believe that Steven was talking about an 8+++ size group vs a singular target. You are now choosing to think that Steven didn't even talk about group pvp.
he literally said make a raid call and target the same person. qell he said raid call, implying a large group of people, not a party of 8 or an incomplete party. you choose to believe he was only talking about 8 men groups.
there isn't any reason to believe he talked about only a group of 8. a group is more than 1 person. so we all think different thing based on our subjective understanding of what steven said. so if this is all subjective, why are you more right than me?
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?
3 tanks. you definetely want at least 1 cleric for the heals 1 bard for the buffs. that leaves 3 dps. will probably need summoner to support too or debuff, depending what it does, and chances are you will need 2 clerics in this game for PVP (that's more likely than needing 3 tanks). we don't know for sure. lets say 3 dps. maybe if you pull a squishy, you can kill him fast, who knows.
if you start adding more tanks, who will you remove from the party?
Are you sure it will end up being 3 tanks given current design, though? Can you expand on why?
Regarding Summoner, I know they said they'd release one, but how would the class function in Ashes specifically? TTK on the quick side and abundance of mobility means pets will have similar issues as Tanks when it comes to being roadblocks.
We're still concerned about the role of Bards and what buffs they can even bring to be relevant, so the side of Summoner that relies on buffs would encounter the same concerns.
And if you take Summoner in a more damage oriented route, I would expect Rangers and Fighters to be more valuable given what we've seen.
So once again, how would Summoner work?
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).
Def not a strait buff. There shouldn't be a "no aoe" button in the game.
I do like the idea of a cone behind the tank, that's a great idea. It would have to be something the tank uses though, like something on the hotbar with a cooldown. Perhaps specing into it can give more frequent uses. It has to for sure be something the tank does, instead of something he has. In that way it totally fits into the idea of the party making tactical decisions in combat and the tank making choices about where to spend points.
Those types of tools can be a way for a small party to mitigate against a zerg and give themselves more time.
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.
Mag, just please go watch the clip again. He literally talks about "dps vs dps", "healer/tank vs healer/tank" and then talks about group pvp and says "targets can be killed *snap* like that".
So when we draw a line between "a dps character can be killed in 10s" and "in a group vs group situation a target can die in a second" (snap signifies that second) - it's not difficult to come to a conclusion that several situations have been considered when explaining those encounters, because one directly relates to the other.
Depraved chose to believe that Steven was talking about an 8+++ size group vs a singular target. You are now choosing to think that Steven didn't even talk about group pvp.
Again group comps will increase the life of people like every other game. On top of the skill ceiling that was also talked about.
You can not believe it if you want, what steven said is if everyone targets someone yes you can kill them. You are skewing words to fit your narrative to try to complain what he is talking about.
Saying you can be targeted doesn't you you won't have ways to extend your life higher than normal its literarily common sense. As well as he said average which has a lot of meaning in itself. Your points make almost 0 sense because the fact again you can focus on more defensive type options. Those stack stronger with group comps meaning you can survive longer.
This is why you were given for tank cleric 20-30 ttk, this means there is plenty of room and things aren't' set in strong this is a mmo. Which again further geos to the conclusion you are complaining without any actual backing to your argument. You are basing your argument off assumptions.
THere is 0 quote of him saying in a team comp, with skill and defensive skill tree you can die within the 10 second ttk. And giving a clear break down of why that is, or how you can use skill to get to that point.
Its really obvious to people, but your bias to complain won't allow you to see that.
Comments
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.
So when we draw a line between "a dps character can be killed in 10s" and "in a group vs group situation a target can die in a second" (snap signifies that second) - it's not difficult to come to a conclusion that several situations have been considered when explaining those encounters, because one directly relates to the other.
Depraved chose to believe that Steven was talking about an 8+++ size group vs a singular target. You are now choosing to think that Steven didn't even talk about group pvp.
3 tanks. you definetely want at least 1 cleric for the heals 1 bard for the buffs. that leaves 3 dps. will probably need summoner to support too or debuff, depending what it does, and chances are you will need 2 clerics in this game for PVP (that's more likely than needing 3 tanks). we don't know for sure. lets say 3 dps. maybe if you pull a squishy, you can kill him fast, who knows.
if you start adding more tanks, who will you remove from the party?
Or the 2 Tanks could be adding DPS Augments from Social Orgs or Religions, etc.
he literally said make a raid call and target the same person. qell he said raid call, implying a large group of people, not a party of 8 or an incomplete party. you choose to believe he was only talking about 8 men groups.
there isn't any reason to believe he talked about only a group of 8. a group is more than 1 person. so we all think different thing based on our subjective understanding of what steven said. so if this is all subjective, why are you more right than me?
Are you sure it will end up being 3 tanks given current design, though? Can you expand on why?
Regarding Summoner, I know they said they'd release one, but how would the class function in Ashes specifically? TTK on the quick side and abundance of mobility means pets will have similar issues as Tanks when it comes to being roadblocks.
We're still concerned about the role of Bards and what buffs they can even bring to be relevant, so the side of Summoner that relies on buffs would encounter the same concerns.
And if you take Summoner in a more damage oriented route, I would expect Rangers and Fighters to be more valuable given what we've seen.
So once again, how would Summoner work?
Def not a strait buff. There shouldn't be a "no aoe" button in the game.
I do like the idea of a cone behind the tank, that's a great idea. It would have to be something the tank uses though, like something on the hotbar with a cooldown. Perhaps specing into it can give more frequent uses. It has to for sure be something the tank does, instead of something he has. In that way it totally fits into the idea of the party making tactical decisions in combat and the tank making choices about where to spend points.
Those types of tools can be a way for a small party to mitigate against a zerg and give themselves more time.
Again group comps will increase the life of people like every other game. On top of the skill ceiling that was also talked about.
You can not believe it if you want, what steven said is if everyone targets someone yes you can kill them. You are skewing words to fit your narrative to try to complain what he is talking about.
Saying you can be targeted doesn't you you won't have ways to extend your life higher than normal its literarily common sense. As well as he said average which has a lot of meaning in itself. Your points make almost 0 sense because the fact again you can focus on more defensive type options. Those stack stronger with group comps meaning you can survive longer.
This is why you were given for tank cleric 20-30 ttk, this means there is plenty of room and things aren't' set in strong this is a mmo. Which again further geos to the conclusion you are complaining without any actual backing to your argument. You are basing your argument off assumptions.
THere is 0 quote of him saying in a team comp, with skill and defensive skill tree you can die within the 10 second ttk. And giving a clear break down of why that is, or how you can use skill to get to that point.
Its really obvious to people, but your bias to complain won't allow you to see that.