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?
I feel strawmanned here...
i said 3 tanks because you said 3 tanks.
regarding summoners, we already know that they will have at least 2 play styles. one is playing with the pet and the master is basically a support for the pet, and the other one is the pet is a support for the master. pets wont have the same issues as tank because they will most likely have different skills, you know, the summoner being a different class.
for mass pvp, id say the summoner will probably be preferred over a fighter if it ends up being a ranged class. also potentially irreplaceable supporting abilities. it all depends what the class can offer. if its end up being in a party for its supporting abilities, then 3 tanks, 1 cleric 1 bard, 1 summoner leaves only 2 slots for dps...really, can 2 dps one shot someone after they get pulled and cc'ed? the other 6 classes combined might not have enough damage + they gonna be focused on supporting + the person pulled has a healer as well.
i highly doubt you will need more than 1 tank in a party. and we will probably need 0 tanks in a pure pvp party.
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.
And none of those classes will have as big of a dps values as a pure dps class, just as classes with cleric secondary won't be able to heal a raid as well as a cleric will. That was my point.
Those types of tools can be a way for a small party to mitigate against a zerg and give themselves more time.
My main concern here has been the "*snap* it's dead" thing that Steven talked about. I don't want that speed. Having a cd on the effect I proposed would lead us back to the snapping.
There should simply be a ton of other ways to disable tank's aura. Hell, it could be influenced by a silence effect or smth similar.
I've just played enough L2 in an archer/dagger party where "the enemy healer dies before the fight begins" was the main rule. And considering where AoC's design seems to be heading - we'll have the same situation here as well.
Its really obvious to people, but your bias to complain won't allow you to see that.
Ok, you know the game Steven is making better than him. You've obviously tested it behind the scenes and have told the designers how the game will work. So I obviously should trust your words on this matter, rather than the creative director's, who's words I simply repeated to you w/o changing anything about them.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
And none of those classes will have as big of a dps values as a pure dps class, just as classes with cleric secondary won't be able to heal a raid as well as a cleric will. That was my point.
They can cumulatively. Depends on how they synergize and stack their attacks.
Rather than depending on individual rotations.
They can cumulatively. Depends on how they synergize and stack their attacks.
Rather than depending on individual rotations.
Unless I completely misunderstood Steven's goal for augments - no class will be as powerful as the main archetype that determined the class (obviously outside of doubles).
In other words, if tank's "tanking power" = 1, a class that has tank as a secondary might be 0.8 at max progression. And I don't see why Intrepid would design their math in such a way that 0.8x8 somehow = more than 1x8.
In other words, I expect synergy between dpses to produce more damage than synergy between non-dps archetypes that took a dps secondary. If you disagree with that expectation - great, hope you're right.
According to steven the TTK will be 10-15 seconds , are you guys ready to have fun getting 1 shot all the time , gonna be fun for a lot of the people who loved the game having a 30 sec-1m TTK
The whole TTK discussion is pointless before Alpha 2. What do you even want the developers to do? They can design abilities right now, and then let people test out how long it takes to kill each other with these abilities in different situations. Based on that feedback, they can then nerf or buff the abilities to where it feels good.
We are not yet at the "let people test it out" part, so there is no point in debating whether TTK should be longer or shorter. It's not about how long or short it is in the first place; it's about it feeling good. For that, it needs to be balanced between not getting one-shotted and not being boring because you can just tank for minutes without doing anything just because you have high HP.
Exactly how long a good TTK will be depends on different factors, like how many abilities we will have on the bar, etc. These are factors we don't even know yet.
For the empyre !!!
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Unless I completely misunderstood Steven's goal for augments - no class will be as powerful as the main archetype that determined the class (obviously outside of doubles).
In other words, if tank's "tanking power" = 1, a class that has tank as a secondary might be 0.8 at max progression. And I don't see why Intrepid would design their math in such a way that 0.8x8 somehow = more than 1x8.
In other words, I expect synergy between dpses to produce more damage than synergy between non-dps archetypes that took a dps secondary. If you disagree with that expectation - great, hope you're right.
Again, you are focusing on individual rotation rather than on synergizing abilities with the other players in the Group.
I did not suggest that one x/Rogue in a group will be as effective as a Rogue/x.
The math should not be as simple as 0.8x8.
If the x/Rogues in the group synergize their abilities, rather than just focusing on their individual rotations, they should be able to compensate for the lack of Rogue/x dps. Although, they still might be missing non-dps Rogue Utilities.
Again, you are focusing on individual rotation rather than on synergizing abilities with the other players in the Group.
I did not suggest that one x/Rogue in a group will be as effective as a Rogue/x.
The last paragraph talks explicitly about synergies.
0
Options
ApokMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
According to steven the TTK will be 10-15 seconds , are you guys ready to have fun getting 1 shot all the time , gonna be fun for a lot of the people who loved the game having a 30 sec-1m TTK
The whole TTK discussion is pointless before Alpha 2. What do you even want the developers to do? They can design abilities right now, and then let people test out how long it takes to kill each other with these abilities in different situations. Based on that feedback, they can then nerf or buff the abilities to where it feels good.
We are not yet at the "let people test it out" part, so there is no point in debating whether TTK should be longer or shorter. It's not about how long or short it is in the first place; it's about it feeling good. For that, it needs to be balanced between not getting one-shotted and not being boring because you can just tank for minutes without doing anything just because you have high HP.
Exactly how long a good TTK will be depends on different factors, like how many abilities we will have on the bar, etc. These are factors we don't even know yet.
I feel like it's a pointless discussion in general, go play any group pvp that uses the holy trinity and you'll quickly notice the supports are the ones who carry the fights. NW is this way. if you go into group pvp and your side lacks heals you die almost instantly but with healers you sustain. too many healers and not enough dps on both sides everything turns into a good 3~5 minute brawl until people peal off and take down the healers.
2
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
It doesn't. Your math suggests each x/Rogue is doing their individual rotations; rather than stacking their DPS attacks.
It doesn't. Your math suggests each x/Rogue is doing their individual rotations; rather than stacking their DPS attacks.
I used multiplication precisely to show that each party member multiplies the power of another member. If I wanted to say "8 people doing their single-player rotations" I would've used addition.
I feel like it's a pointless discussion in general, go play any group pvp that uses the holy trinity and you'll quickly notice the supports are the ones who carry the fights. NW is this way. if you go into group pvp and your side lacks heals you die almost instantly but with healers you sustain. too many healers and not enough dps on both sides everything turns into a good 3~5 minute brawl until people peal off and take down the healers.
So far it seems like There are no Cleanse skills. So some sleep skills used on a healer could make the difference. Also Fighter's bleed will reduce healing done + reduce dmg mitigation. So i doubt stacking healers will be as effective. Especially since fighter class will be really popular (or at least i expect it to be).
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I used multiplication precisely to show that each party member multiplies the power of another member. If I wanted to say "8 people doing their single-player rotations" I would've used addition.
LMAO
0.8x8 is the same thing as 0.8 + 0.8 + 0.8 + 0.8 + 0.8 + 0.8 + 0.8 + 0.8
Again, you did not indicate stacking abilities. Which is more than that sum.
Also it would be 0.8x8 is greater than 1.
But, you still have to factor in stacking bonuses, rather than just adding x/Rogue 8 times.
(or x/Tank 8 times)
i highly doubt you will need more than 1 tank in a party. and we will probably need 0 tanks in a pure pvp party.
Nah, I figured out what happened here, it was just a silly misunderstanding. I said two or MAYBE three tanks because I was theorycrafting the possible results of a buff Nikr was talking about (he made some good points tho). This isn't something I believe in or am attached to, it was just me basically trying to figure out how it might all look, because we still don't know how Intrepid plans to approach party buffs.
So, it is now very clear to me you still expect parties to have 1 or 0 tanks, thank you. I don't immediately disagree OR agree with this. My position is very simply that I can't yet figure out how Intrepid is planning to make Tanks and Bards both useful and fun to play with the current setup (mobility and TTK wise). You could for example turn them into buffbots but is it also fun?
regarding summoners, we already know that they will have at least 2 play styles. one is playing with the pet and the master is basically a support for the pet, and the other one is the pet is a support for the master. pets wont have the same issues as tank because they will most likely have different skills, you know, the summoner being a different class.
for mass pvp, id say the summoner will probably be preferred over a fighter if it ends up being a ranged class. also potentially irreplaceable supporting abilities. it all depends what the class can offer. if its end up being in a party for its supporting abilities, then 3 tanks, 1 cleric 1 bard, 1 summoner leaves only 2 slots for dps...really, can 2 dps one shot someone after they get pulled and cc'ed? the other 6 classes combined might not have enough damage + they gonna be focused on supporting + the person pulled has a healer as well.
What I'm trying to say is that Summoner is going to inherit any and all issues of the classes whole role they overlap with (even a bit). If the Tank struggles to roadblock a highly mobile target, so will the Summoner/their pet. If a Bard's buffs don't get to make enough difference because the fight is already over, so will the Summoner's. And so on.
If you disagree, that's fine, but I'd love an explanation why. Because depending on that, Summoner can either end up overshadowing other classes or being overshadowed by them.
Edit: Fixed weird quote stuff.
Bow before the Emperor and your lives shall be spared. Refuse to bow and your lives shall be speared.
Yeah, and WAY FASTER in group situations. It's gonna be a bloodbath. I personally highly dislike it.
It might be 10-15 seconds based on group combat because they said the game would be balanced around groups so the time to kill he gave might be in a 8v8 situation not a 1v1 situation.
10-15 second TTK sounds about right to me from a pvp perspective tbh
also TTK times tend to be based on hitting somone who just standing there and not doing anything to defend themselfs acting like a dummy. So in actual fights it would probaly be quite a bit longer
Yeah, and WAY FASTER in group situations. It's gonna be a bloodbath. I personally highly dislike it.
It might be 10-15 seconds based on group combat because they said the game would be balanced around groups so the time to kill he gave might be in a 8v8 situation not a 1v1 situation.
10-15 second TTK sounds about right to me from a pvp perspective tbh
also TTK times tend to be based on hitting somone who just standing there and not doing anything to defend themselfs acting like a dummy. So in actual fights it would probaly be quite a bit longer
I'm actually really encouraged by the number of people who have this 'reframing of what Steven said' as their response to this topic, since it implies a lot about what the response will be in Alpha-2.
I also see a benefit in the fact that it creates one of those situations where Intrepid can change something and then 'quietly pretend this is what Steven meant all along' if necessary, but on the other hand, this is also one of those situations where, if it did change due to feedback, it would be a good thing to talk about as proof of their willingness to listen to feedback.
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.
And none of those classes will have as big of a dps values as a pure dps class, just as classes with cleric secondary won't be able to heal a raid as well as a cleric will. That was my point.
Those types of tools can be a way for a small party to mitigate against a zerg and give themselves more time.
My main concern here has been the "*snap* it's dead" thing that Steven talked about. I don't want that speed. Having a cd on the effect I proposed would lead us back to the snapping.
There should simply be a ton of other ways to disable tank's aura. Hell, it could be influenced by a silence effect or smth similar.
I've just played enough L2 in an archer/dagger party where "the enemy healer dies before the fight begins" was the main rule. And considering where AoC's design seems to be heading - we'll have the same situation here as well.
Its really obvious to people, but your bias to complain won't allow you to see that.
Ok, you know the game Steven is making better than him. You've obviously tested it behind the scenes and have told the designers how the game will work. So I obviously should trust your words on this matter, rather than the creative director's, who's words I simply repeated to you w/o changing anything about them.
So now u are at the point about saying i know the game better than him, what I'm saying is you guys have no clue what you are talking about. When are you going to realize your bias is stretching what he is saying and you literally are not MAKING any point and every thing you are saying holds 0 weight.
I can't believe i need to go over every detail in the video because you don't have a point so you are trying to make things up in your head so complain about ttk. This could be a long post because honestly the BS you guys are bringing up needs to stop.
know 10 to 15 seconds upwards of 30 seconds depending on the arch type right
39:09
um so you know obviously the more restorative uh Arch types like a cleric or whatever might be able to last longer
39:15
or a tank might be able to last longer if they're facing another tank or if they're facing another cleric right then it's going to be like a you know Whiffle
bat Fest or something um uh and then if you're talking about you know two DPS
39:27
against each other um that's going to be real fast um so so I would say that's
Instantly you can see the ttk he is talking about is between various classes and longer kill times directed at tank vrs tank and cleric vrs cleric. It is EXTREMELY CLEAR he is talking about 1v1 situations and certain ones with his comment as well.
He does on to say the faster times would be dps against DPS, which you can look at the 10-15 ttk he was talking about.
Your point here that he is talking about different team comps, defensive skill trees, heavy kiting, generals support, etc. Is made up fantasy, you are doing this because you do not have a point and are trying to make up a issue to support your non existent argument
organized in the way that you have um targeting and Target assists and
39:47
that you call you know raid calling like there is opportunities there to have
39:53
multiple DPSS take out a Target real quick right and and because of that type of precision
Now you are using this quote and mixing it up with his previous take about group play and that they planned for it with TTK (10-15 15-30) that is incorrect. His comment here only relates to that if you are doing group or RAID calling (which means a lot of people) multiple DPS can focus someone and kill them quickly. You have 0 context or knowledge of the actually game (as you have not played the GAME) on how that is going to work and amount of DPS you need to do that.
On top of that you do not have context for different situation in the game, this is what i talk about when im mentioning waves. There can be gaps or changes to take a opportunity for your advantage to kill people. This exist pretty much ALL games in relation to pvp to varying extents. A tank might not be guarding someone, or not using a skill and its easier to kill them. Where if the tank had the skill on it wouldn't be as easy to do that.
Steven is not giving a detailed breakdown here on fights nor should he, when you have been given a little information and you are trying to be like mr fantastic and stretch it.
numbers over skilled there is now a better opportunity for the smaller group to
41:17
Prevail against the larger group if they are better organized and more skillful which tends to be the case in smaller
41:24
groups right so intrinsic those two philosophies are tied to one another
41:30
right the shorter ttk and the how do you solve the Zerg problem well by
Just going to say where when he is talking about skill is is in relation to both team play and individual skill. Which means there is a skill ceiling for players to use and be more effective or be less effective. IE like i keep saying that some people will know how to survive longer but also prevent people from doing that.
Honestly stop the cap on this "You know the game better than steven" I'm not even going to say i know the game better than you guys are making these bad takes as it isn't about having a legitime conversation. But just a outlet for you to complain because its not your style. You want to feel in your heart you are right to give you fuel as you use a mix of truth and falsities to give you the fuel to keep going.
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.
And none of those classes will have as big of a dps values as a pure dps class, just as classes with cleric secondary won't be able to heal a raid as well as a cleric will. That was my point.
i highly doubt you will need more than 1 tank in a party. and we will probably need 0 tanks in a pure pvp party.
Nah, I figured out what happened here, it was just a silly misunderstanding. I said two or MAYBE three tanks because I was theorycrafting the possible results of a buff Nikr was talking about (he made some good points tho). This isn't something I believe in or am attached to, it was just me basically trying to figure out how it might all look, because we still don't know how Intrepid plans to approach party buffs.
So, it is now very clear to me you still expect parties to have 1 or 0 tanks, thank you. I don't immediately disagree OR agree with this. My position is very simply that I can't yet figure out how Intrepid is planning to make Tanks and Bards both useful and fun to play with the current setup (mobility and TTK wise). You could for example turn them into buffbots but is it also fun?
regarding summoners, we already know that they will have at least 2 play styles. one is playing with the pet and the master is basically a support for the pet, and the other one is the pet is a support for the master. pets wont have the same issues as tank because they will most likely have different skills, you know, the summoner being a different class.
for mass pvp, id say the summoner will probably be preferred over a fighter if it ends up being a ranged class. also potentially irreplaceable supporting abilities. it all depends what the class can offer. if its end up being in a party for its supporting abilities, then 3 tanks, 1 cleric 1 bard, 1 summoner leaves only 2 slots for dps...really, can 2 dps one shot someone after they get pulled and cc'ed? the other 6 classes combined might not have enough damage + they gonna be focused on supporting + the person pulled has a healer as well.
What I'm trying to say is that Summoner is going to inherit any and all issues of the classes whole role they overlap with (even a bit). If the Tank struggles to roadblock a highly mobile target, so will the Summoner/their pet. If a Bard's buffs don't get to make enough difference because the fight is already over, so will the Summoner's. And so on.
If you disagree, that's fine, but I'd love an explanation why. Because depending on that, Summoner can either end up overshadowing other classes or being overshadowed by them.
Edit: Fixed weird quote stuff.
ah ok got it ;3
summoner could or could not have those problems though. for example, if the summoner places a bunch of dots on you, then even if you dash away and the summoner cant catch you, you would still die. we have to wait and see its kit xD
According to steven the TTK will be 10-15 seconds , are you guys ready to have fun getting 1 shot all the time
I gotta say, have you never played an mmo before? I mean if we look at the examples of the "greatest mmorpgs of all time" like idk, vanilla wow which everyone loves so much, you can literally die in 2-5 seconds in any phase of the game. ESO, Archeage, whatever you name it are all the same and the games with long TTK make it IMPOSSIBLE to kill anyone with a healer. I think you're overreacting and we should test out alpha 2 first.
because you kept saying steven was referring to 8 men groups, not raid groups T_T
Yes, and I've already said that we both chose to believe what we think is a logical conclusion from what Steven said, based on our own previous experiences.
I never said I was more right. You can look at Mag's posts and compare them to mine and then tell me, whose posts sound more like "I KNOW I'M RIGHT AND YOU'RE DEFINITELY WRONG AND HAVE NO FUCKING CLUE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT"
because you kept saying steven was referring to 8 men groups, not raid groups T_T
Yes, and I've already said that we both chose to believe what we think is a logical conclusion from what Steven said, based on our own previous experiences.
I never said I was more right. You can look at Mag's posts and compare them to mine and then tell me, whose posts sound more like "I KNOW I'M RIGHT AND YOU'RE DEFINITELY WRONG AND HAVE NO FUCKING CLUE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT"
You are free to respond, it is never to late to walk back on some of the points you have been saying. As I've clearly pointed out the exaggeration / falseness.
Which means you should be more positive about it regardless, well unless its not about skill / knowledge to improving your situation with ttk and just about them making it a flat higher number.
because you kept saying steven was referring to 8 men groups, not raid groups T_T
Yes, and I've already said that we both chose to believe what we think is a logical conclusion from what Steven said, based on our own previous experiences.
I never said I was more right. You can look at Mag's posts and compare them to mine and then tell me, whose posts sound more like "I KNOW I'M RIGHT AND YOU'RE DEFINITELY WRONG AND HAVE NO FUCKING CLUE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT"
You are free to respond, it is never to late to walk back on some of the points you have been saying. As I've clearly pointed out the exaggeration / falseness.
Which means you should be more positive about it regardless, well unless its not about skill / knowledge to improving your situation with ttk and just about them making it a flat higher number.
Hm, not quite. From the perspective of 'will it be good', that's not really as big a deal as one other pretty big thing here.
If the line on the Wiki that said "Ashes of Creation will have a 30-60 second TTK" had instead, from the beginning, been 'Ashes of Creation will have a TTK that is a bit faster than most MMOs you're probably used to', a LOT of people who are here now would not be here.
Would there be different people? Maybe.
But it's up to Intrepid (and I guess you and I, to some extent) to convince people this can actually be good given everything.
Problem is, I don't really have much evidence to give, and you're not one for giving it.
You are free to respond, it is never to late to walk back on some of the points you have been saying. As I've clearly pointed out the exaggeration / falseness.
There is no point in responding because you're always doing to me what you claim I'm doing to you. I never said the things you claim I did in your big post
This entire thread I've been saying "dps vs dps is 10-15s", "tanks/healers are ~30s" (and I even said that "it might not even be tank vs tank", cause Steven's wording there is more vague than in other parts), "group pvp will be killing people in 1s, as signified by Steven snapping his fingers", "when Steven is talking about group pvp he accounts for any of Intrepid's future plans for its balancing, which would include any potential defensive and offensive buffs/effects".
That's it. Unless you point to where I said "1v1 pvp is about both people being supported by other players" - I don't know what else I can say to make you see that I'm literally repeating what Steven said and saying "I don't like/want this design".
because you kept saying steven was referring to 8 men groups, not raid groups T_T
Yes, and I've already said that we both chose to believe what we think is a logical conclusion from what Steven said, based on our own previous experiences.
I never said I was more right. You can look at Mag's posts and compare them to mine and then tell me, whose posts sound more like "I KNOW I'M RIGHT AND YOU'RE DEFINITELY WRONG AND HAVE NO FUCKING CLUE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT"
You are free to respond, it is never to late to walk back on some of the points you have been saying. As I've clearly pointed out the exaggeration / falseness.
Which means you should be more positive about it regardless, well unless its not about skill / knowledge to improving your situation with ttk and just about them making it a flat higher number.
Hm, not quite. From the perspective of 'will it be good', that's not really as big a deal as one other pretty big thing here.
If the line on the Wiki that said "Ashes of Creation will have a 30-60 second TTK" had instead, from the beginning, been 'Ashes of Creation will have a TTK that is a bit faster than most MMOs you're probably used to', a LOT of people who are here now would not be here.
Would there be different people? Maybe.
But it's up to Intrepid (and I guess you and I, to some extent) to convince people this can actually be good given everything.
Problem is, I don't really have much evidence to give, and you're not one for giving it.
Kind of hard to debate what will feel good (until we play), at this point it really is about preferences. I'm not saying he should want a different preference, but the idea is that the times can be longer if you are skilled. Which if one wants longer ttk that is a good thing.
You are right in the fact different people enjoy different things. So messaging can draw different people, but it is development so nothing is really set in stone that early. For me i understand that both for things I like and don't liek and expect changes (ie i dont agree with mass res, i made my point. But devs plan to have it in some form so ill play it and then give more feed back after).
My main issue as i said in my post was this information going around that the devs have planned for the combat, group compositions, player itemization and skill kits, universal defense skill tree (in development) and saying the ttk is based off all that and will only be 10-15. Which was clearly not true based off the exact quotes i pulled.
People should like what they like though, but I feel the main core of people won't say anything until they see the game in a more complete state. But know knows maybe alpha 2 will start to draw in more people to start talking on reddit / discords.
You are free to respond, it is never to late to walk back on some of the points you have been saying. As I've clearly pointed out the exaggeration / falseness.
There is no point in responding because you're always doing to me what you claim I'm doing to you. I never said the things you claim I did in your big post
This entire thread I've been saying "dps vs dps is 10-15s", "tanks/healers are ~30s" (and I even said that "it might not even be tank vs tank", cause Steven's wording there is more vague than in other parts), "group pvp will be killing people in 1s, as signified by Steven snapping his fingers", "when Steven is talking about group pvp he accounts for any of Intrepid's future plans for its balancing, which would include any potential defensive and offensive buffs/effects".
That's it. Unless you point to where I said "1v1 pvp is about both people being supported by other players" - I don't know what else I can say to make you see that I'm literally repeating what Steven said and saying "I don't like/want this design".
Steven has stated about being coordinated and targeting someone you will be able to kill them. It is reasonable to believe with larger sizes you won't need to be as coordinated do to all the dmg output 9but could have a lot more deaths in the process of it on your own side).
Again this is where the issue is and why i feel you should be walking that back. You can't make a statement all future designs will be like x and X. If a tank uses a skill to buff you while you are using defensive skills and have a defensive build up, that doesn't mean you are going to die instantly.
For the game to account for all that you would have to be dying in 1-2 hits without any buffs / build support. There is going to be points based on your kit where you will be more empowered and do to being able to dodge some attacks, negate all dmg completely. If there is a skill ceiling that means there is a certain amount of leeway for players to not just die instantly and be able to react in a raid setting.
If we are talkin about a 8v8 group setting we have to look at all the skills that can help kite, cc, increase defense, heal, etc. That would be the most honest disccusion as you can know somewhat of the upper level on survivability.
Ie if a dps is coming for someone and they get their dmg reduced by 30%, and the target they are attacking is having a defensive buff and heals. What is the dmg that dps is doing for the TTk at that point. if it takes the DPS 5-7 seconds longer to be able to kill the person (is that dps the dps is attacking now suddenly has a 20 sec ttk) and now he gets cc'd and is kited, what is the life of the target do to the heals is he back at full now. This kinds of things need to be kept in mind when you are talking about ttk and how it feels. And what it means about coordination and of course it can go the other way with good attacks setting themselves up..
Again this is where the issue is and why i feel you should be walking that back. You can't make a statement all future designs will be like x and X.
And I didn't make that statement. I simply repeated what Steven said and said "I don't like this design". It was Steven who said that this is their current approach to ttk balancing.
If he did jump from 1v1 pvp all the way up to "a full raid targeting a single player" - I'm somewhat fine that, but then we'd need to talk about aoe scaling, and that's a whole different discussion that has already happened in the past.
But if he did mean party vs party when he said "group pvp" - then I'd prefer if ttk was longer. Mainly because there's 2 ways to take his ttk timings:
the target stands around doing nothing
the target uses everything in their toolkit to avoid dying
If 10-15 ttk is in the context of the first option - it means that a dps class dies in around 5-10 damaging abilities, purely on hp values (this estimate is based on average cast times shown on streams). This then implies that a party of people can use all their best damaging abilities at once and wipe a target "in a snap".
This was my reasoning behind believing that Steven was talking about party pvp when he said group, and not "a raid is attacking a single person".
Now if we look at the second option - things are WAAAAY worse. Because now the target is moving and using defensive abilities - AND IT'S STILL A 10-15s TTK. This means that the hp values of that target are below the floor, which means that direct-damage's worth of ttk is probably like 4-5s.
And if THAT is the case - a party can wipe 2 people in a snap, if they get the jump on them.
Depraved and a few other people believe that Steven was talking about the first option (I don't remember which one you believe, cause this has been a long convo). And as I described above, Steven's "snap" still aligns with "a party targeting a single player in the enemy party" situation, and not just a "raid doing the same" one.
As for big defensive buffs or strong healing, that can supposedly save that single player - these would, first of all, only work if the defending side saw the attackers coming, but would also depend on what other tools the attackers have. Due to us not knowing any of those tools, I've been talking about attackers getting a jump on their target (which is usually the healer) and killing it "in a snap".
And I've already given my suggestion for how this perceived issue could be addressed and also gave my reasoning for seeing it as an issue (namely my L2 experience of healers "being snapped"). If you believe that Intrepid will go away from this "snapping" design and add defensive tools that prevent it - cool, you agree with me.
But this belief goes directly against what Steven has stated, which is why it's funny that you seem to agree with Steven, while disagreeing with me. If you think he was only talking about a "raid attacking a single target" - we'll just have to disagree on that interpretation.
Again this is where the issue is and why i feel you should be walking that back. You can't make a statement all future designs will be like x and X.
And I didn't make that statement. I simply repeated what Steven said and said "I don't like this design". It was Steven who said that this is their current approach to ttk balancing.
If he did jump from 1v1 pvp all the way up to "a full raid targeting a single player" - I'm somewhat fine that, but then we'd need to talk about aoe scaling, and that's a whole different discussion that has already happened in the past.
But if he did mean party vs party when he said "group pvp" - then I'd prefer if ttk was longer. Mainly because there's 2 ways to take his ttk timings:
the target stands around doing nothing
the target uses everything in their toolkit to avoid dying
If 10-15 ttk is in the context of the first option - it means that a dps class dies in around 5-10 damaging abilities, purely on hp values (this estimate is based on average cast times shown on streams). This then implies that a party of people can use all their best damaging abilities at once and wipe a target "in a snap".
This was my reasoning behind believing that Steven was talking about party pvp when he said group, and not "a raid is attacking a single person".
Now if we look at the second option - things are WAAAAY worse. Because now the target is moving and using defensive abilities - AND IT'S STILL A 10-15s TTK. This means that the hp values of that target are below the floor, which means that direct-damage's worth of ttk is probably like 4-5s.
And if THAT is the case - a party can wipe 2 people in a snap, if they get the jump on them.
Depraved and a few other people believe that Steven was talking about the first option (I don't remember which one you believe, cause this has been a long convo). And as I described above, Steven's "snap" still aligns with "a party targeting a single player in the enemy party" situation, and not just a "raid doing the same" one.
As for big defensive buffs or strong healing, that can supposedly save that single player - these would, first of all, only work if the defending side saw the attackers coming, but would also depend on what other tools the attackers have. Due to us not knowing any of those tools, I've been talking about attackers getting a jump on their target (which is usually the healer) and killing it "in a snap".
And I've already given my suggestion for how this perceived issue could be addressed and also gave my reasoning for seeing it as an issue (namely my L2 experience of healers "being snapped"). If you believe that Intrepid will go away from this "snapping" design and add defensive tools that prevent it - cool, you agree with me.
But this belief goes directly against what Steven has stated, which is why it's funny that you seem to agree with Steven, while disagreeing with me. If you think he was only talking about a "raid attacking a single target" - we'll just have to disagree on that interpretation.
bruh. 5-10 abilities, that's 5 -10 players to evaporate the target. even if everyone in the party attacked at the same time, you would only have 8 people attacking (also I highly doubt its 5 abilities). but anyway, how often are you going to get hit by the cleric, the bard, the tank, the summoner, the ranger, the mage, the rogue and the warrior at the exact same time? that means you would literally need to be in melee range of a full party to die that quick, so even with a higher ttk, you will most likely not survive anyways. and they would still need to click and hit f1 at the exact same time. if someone is a second late, you get healed.
that also means all the supports stopped supporting and started dpsing. if you only count the dps in the party (4) that's four abilities. you have time to get healed or do something, and that's if you are a squishy dps in melee range. you also have to consider that you might need to set up your powerful skills using normal attack combos, like make your target bleed to increase your backstab damage, etc. i doubt people will die in the blink of an eye in 8v8. they might die after the kill has been set up, which might take more than 10-15 seconds.
I highly doubt that will see people of equal level and gear getting one shotted by a single coordinated F1 of 4 people in a party vs party. when you add a second, a third or even a fourth party, etc. that will happen for sure. but not in 8v8
I highly doubt that will see people of equal level and gear getting one shotted by a single coordinated F1 of 4 people in a party vs party. when you add a second, a third or even a fourth party, etc. that will happen for sure. but not in 8v8
Except we've already seen that during the caravan showcase, which is also supported by the fighter showcase. Right now ~100dmg abilities take somewhere around 1s to cast. Stronger abilities take longer, but also deal x3-4 the damage.
So far we've seen that mages/healers are at lower hp values than melee chars (~1k compared to 1.5k). Leveling higher obviously gives more hp (lvl25 mage from the last showcase had 3k hp), but I'd assume that damage increases with lvl as well, so the only assumption I can make here is that ttk will remain similar (or potentially that is the exact ttk Steven was talking about).
Snipe from the caravan showcase did almost 400 dmg to a tank. Steven was lvl25 there (against assumedly lvl15 people), so let's assume it does 200 at lvl15 (everyone else in Steven's party did ~400, so I assume they were lvl25s too). At 200 dmg, that's 1/8 of a tank's hp and 1/5 of a healer's.
I'd imagine a strong long cast mage nuke has a similar dmg value. A rogue attack from stealth could potentially do even more, but let's say it's the same, but it obviously requires being in melee (but we have stealth). So even in these assumptions, that's already 3/5 of a healer's hp from just 3 dps characters.
I'd assume cleric/summoner/bard/tank can all use some ranged attack (either ability or bow) and warrior could be the first one to initiate into a stun synergy with a relatively low dmg value. Even if bow shots + stun do ~200 collective dmg - the stun would still provide just enough time to finish off the healer "in a snap".
And again, this is not counting any potential dps augments or cleric/bard/summoner having range abilities that are stronger than a simple bow shot.
Any potential buffs from either side can be disregarded cause they either balance each other out, or Steven took them into account when giving his timings.
To me this sounds like the most basic optimal surprise attack on an enemy party. I've seen COUNTLESS such attacks in L2 by archer/mage parties. Hell, even dagger parties did this through stealth. And all of what I said was in the context of an "one of each" party composition and not any potentially more dpsey setups of "as many archers as you can get".
So again, this was my thought process behind believing that Steven meant "party vs party".
Again this is where the issue is and why i feel you should be walking that back. You can't make a statement all future designs will be like x and X.
And I didn't make that statement. I simply repeated what Steven said and said "I don't like this design". It was Steven who said that this is their current approach to ttk balancing.
If he did jump from 1v1 pvp all the way up to "a full raid targeting a single player" - I'm somewhat fine that, but then we'd need to talk about aoe scaling, and that's a whole different discussion that has already happened in the past.
But if he did mean party vs party when he said "group pvp" - then I'd prefer if ttk was longer. Mainly because there's 2 ways to take his ttk timings:
the target stands around doing nothing
the target uses everything in their toolkit to avoid dying
If 10-15 ttk is in the context of the first option - it means that a dps class dies in around 5-10 damaging abilities, purely on hp values (this estimate is based on average cast times shown on streams). This then implies that a party of people can use all their best damaging abilities at once and wipe a target "in a snap".
This was my reasoning behind believing that Steven was talking about party pvp when he said group, and not "a raid is attacking a single person".
Now if we look at the second option - things are WAAAAY worse. Because now the target is moving and using defensive abilities - AND IT'S STILL A 10-15s TTK. This means that the hp values of that target are below the floor, which means that direct-damage's worth of ttk is probably like 4-5s.
And if THAT is the case - a party can wipe 2 people in a snap, if they get the jump on them.
Depraved and a few other people believe that Steven was talking about the first option (I don't remember which one you believe, cause this has been a long convo). And as I described above, Steven's "snap" still aligns with "a party targeting a single player in the enemy party" situation, and not just a "raid doing the same" one.
As for big defensive buffs or strong healing, that can supposedly save that single player - these would, first of all, only work if the defending side saw the attackers coming, but would also depend on what other tools the attackers have. Due to us not knowing any of those tools, I've been talking about attackers getting a jump on their target (which is usually the healer) and killing it "in a snap".
And I've already given my suggestion for how this perceived issue could be addressed and also gave my reasoning for seeing it as an issue (namely my L2 experience of healers "being snapped"). If you believe that Intrepid will go away from this "snapping" design and add defensive tools that prevent it - cool, you agree with me.
But this belief goes directly against what Steven has stated, which is why it's funny that you seem to agree with Steven, while disagreeing with me. If you think he was only talking about a "raid attacking a single target" - we'll just have to disagree on that interpretation.
The point I'm trying to drive home is its not white or black there is grey area in the game. They have a average ttk they are aiming for with general balancing, but skill and party composition is going to affect that as well. You need to accept that is going to be playing a role and they can't just give a exact answer for that because its impossible.
A rough attacking another rouge but one as the armour type to counter them but in physcial and element, and whatever effect will naturally do much less dmg. We need to accept the fact that we can't say they are saying players are using everything in their kit that is not possible. You aren't going to be expected to have everytinhg all the time as an average, you aren't also going to have every single party composition or piece of gear on you, nor is every opponent going to land every hit or account for you dodging skills. It is not realistic of you to expect that kind of answer even more so during development hence you won't get a answer for that. Again there is going to be tons of grey space.
To the comment about Steven talking about focusing people, id agree as those are his words and intent for the game. But as i said before CONTEXT matters, who is in your comp, do you notice them or some of your team, are you CD's on or off, your builds etc. If you are caught off guard and not using any skills ya you will end up dying, if you see them and you are skilled you might be able to reserve the situation and out play them. If you are bad and can't react and turn buffs, skills, etc on then you might get thanos snapped ya.
I feel the intent is for outplaying people, catching them off guard, etc. Its not 2 groups fighting each other and snapped instantly, you has to be a level of skill there from a side to do it. That is the most reasonable line of thinking if u are talking about that type of content.
Yes we don't know the tools but i expect there to be plenty of tools on both sides, and why situational awareness is important, as well as positioning. It opens up the room to be able to make big plays when it comes to pvp..
I view things from a pvp mind set on how I'd see things going based on my pass experiences. So when i hear certain things like snapped I'm going to ask how that would happen in an actual engagement. On top of my belief people are going to be able to have a chance to react (but that is also a grey area). If you get caught off guard and let a group of 4 people freely buff up and target you and take out your healer, than its not looking for for your group. You need to be able to react just as quickly as you are getting attacked, even if you get caught off guard you should know what their plan would be and who you need to protect.
Ie instant buff team, instant cc them them, make distance if possible, etc. Again if you don't have situational awareness and 4 dps can jump your cleric at the same time i don't know what to say.
*Edit caravan showcase did not show the universal defense tree, that is going to be something people will not be sleeping on (except for glass cannons)
Could see things liek reduce dmg first hit, reduced CC time, greatly reduced first hit cc time, buffs while dodging and blocking, hp barrier and low hp, etc. Also armour types and magic protects are going to be a big deal and setting up your kit.
I feel the intent is for outplaying people, catching them off guard, etc. Its not 2 groups fighting each other and snapped instantly, you has to be a level of skill there from a side to do it. That is the most reasonable line of thinking if u are talking about that type of content.
Which is why I suggested that tank effect. It would make parties fight the party as a whole, rather than removing the healer first and then just cleaning everyone else up.
Ie instant buff team, instant cc them them, make distance if possible, etc. Again if you don't have situational awareness and 4 dps can jump your cleric at the same time i don't know what to say.
It's the same "skill" you've been talking about. Executing a good ambush requires good knowledge of the surroundings and of the enemy's movement.
And in the case of ambushes the attackers always have an advantage (cause that's the entire point), so even if the fighting skill might be higher on the defending side - the ambushers could still come out on top.
Edit caravan showcase did not show the universal defense tree, that is going to be something people will not be sleeping on (except for glass cannons)
Could see things liek reduce dmg first hit, reduced CC time, greatly reduced first hit cc time, buffs while dodging and blocking, hp barrier and low hp, etc. Also armour types and magic protects are going to be a big deal and setting up your kit.
And if those things exist - cool. But then Steven's words would be a lie, or, even worse, they'd mean that nothing is fucking planned and he's just winging it all. I try to believe that there's at least some form of plan for their design and that Steven is presenting their plans for balancing that design. And this belief requires me to think that Steven accounts for any potential builds when talking about averages.
They've been designing, discussing and internally testing all the things they've talked about, so if they have no idea of what those plans can result in - we have a much bigger problem on our hands than "ttk is short".
I feel the intent is for outplaying people, catching them off guard, etc. Its not 2 groups fighting each other and snapped instantly, you has to be a level of skill there from a side to do it. That is the most reasonable line of thinking if u are talking about that type of content.
Which is why I suggested that tank effect. It would make parties fight the party as a whole, rather than removing the healer first and then just cleaning everyone else up.
Ie instant buff team, instant cc them them, make distance if possible, etc. Again if you don't have situational awareness and 4 dps can jump your cleric at the same time i don't know what to say.
It's the same "skill" you've been talking about. Executing a good ambush requires good knowledge of the surroundings and of the enemy's movement.
And in the case of ambushes the attackers always have an advantage (cause that's the entire point), so even if the fighting skill might be higher on the defending side - the ambushers could still come out on top.
Edit caravan showcase did not show the universal defense tree, that is going to be something people will not be sleeping on (except for glass cannons)
Could see things liek reduce dmg first hit, reduced CC time, greatly reduced first hit cc time, buffs while dodging and blocking, hp barrier and low hp, etc. Also armour types and magic protects are going to be a big deal and setting up your kit.
And if those things exist - cool. But then Steven's words would be a lie, or, even worse, they'd mean that nothing is fucking planned and he's just winging it all. I try to believe that there's at least some form of plan for their design and that Steven is presenting their plans for balancing that design. And this belief requires me to think that Steven accounts for any potential builds when talking about averages.
They've been designing, discussing and internally testing all the things they've talked about, so if they have no idea of what those plans can result in - we have a much bigger problem on our hands than "ttk is short".
It really doesn't mean he is lying it be you looking for a reasoning to find that to be true. This is a mmorpg with a lost of customization and builds with what we have been seeing so far. Steven had answered on again average players. You can not hear something being said and think there is no flexibility when the game has customization. You were not given a answer for all situations, the sooner you let that go the better off you will be.
They have a goal and that is what they are aiming for, it doesn't mean it is the be all end all. It also doesn't mean because you have defensive options you can survive for for extended period of time of being attacked without some element of skill.
But as i said about waves and such, you will have instances of advantage that will help protect you in different situations, and allow you to be able to react.
MMorpgs are not easy to be made, id be a bit more chill on the armchair game deving. I'm sure there goal is testing things making sure it feels fun with guesses for balance which than they will be fine tuning things. As i said before you are expecting them to know exactly how everything is going to go, it really is not that easy. Classes, augments, gearing, class skill trees, weapon skill trees, defense skill tress it isn't that simple....On top of all the people they have working on things its not all coming from one person, you can't account for everything you are being way too harsh. They legit are just trying to make a fun game. And i wouldn't say they are winging it, they are developing.
Comments
I feel strawmanned here...
i said 3 tanks because you said 3 tanks.
regarding summoners, we already know that they will have at least 2 play styles. one is playing with the pet and the master is basically a support for the pet, and the other one is the pet is a support for the master. pets wont have the same issues as tank because they will most likely have different skills, you know, the summoner being a different class.
for mass pvp, id say the summoner will probably be preferred over a fighter if it ends up being a ranged class. also potentially irreplaceable supporting abilities. it all depends what the class can offer. if its end up being in a party for its supporting abilities, then 3 tanks, 1 cleric 1 bard, 1 summoner leaves only 2 slots for dps...really, can 2 dps one shot someone after they get pulled and cc'ed? the other 6 classes combined might not have enough damage + they gonna be focused on supporting + the person pulled has a healer as well.
i highly doubt you will need more than 1 tank in a party. and we will probably need 0 tanks in a pure pvp party.
Where did I say I was more right than you? You're probably reading Mag's mind instead of mine here
My main concern here has been the "*snap* it's dead" thing that Steven talked about. I don't want that speed. Having a cd on the effect I proposed would lead us back to the snapping.
There should simply be a ton of other ways to disable tank's aura. Hell, it could be influenced by a silence effect or smth similar.
I've just played enough L2 in an archer/dagger party where "the enemy healer dies before the fight begins" was the main rule. And considering where AoC's design seems to be heading - we'll have the same situation here as well.
Ok, you know the game Steven is making better than him. You've obviously tested it behind the scenes and have told the designers how the game will work. So I obviously should trust your words on this matter, rather than the creative director's, who's words I simply repeated to you w/o changing anything about them.
Rather than depending on individual rotations.
In other words, if tank's "tanking power" = 1, a class that has tank as a secondary might be 0.8 at max progression. And I don't see why Intrepid would design their math in such a way that 0.8x8 somehow = more than 1x8.
In other words, I expect synergy between dpses to produce more damage than synergy between non-dps archetypes that took a dps secondary. If you disagree with that expectation - great, hope you're right.
The whole TTK discussion is pointless before Alpha 2. What do you even want the developers to do? They can design abilities right now, and then let people test out how long it takes to kill each other with these abilities in different situations. Based on that feedback, they can then nerf or buff the abilities to where it feels good.
We are not yet at the "let people test it out" part, so there is no point in debating whether TTK should be longer or shorter. It's not about how long or short it is in the first place; it's about it feeling good. For that, it needs to be balanced between not getting one-shotted and not being boring because you can just tank for minutes without doing anything just because you have high HP.
Exactly how long a good TTK will be depends on different factors, like how many abilities we will have on the bar, etc. These are factors we don't even know yet.
I did not suggest that one x/Rogue in a group will be as effective as a Rogue/x.
The math should not be as simple as 0.8x8.
If the x/Rogues in the group synergize their abilities, rather than just focusing on their individual rotations, they should be able to compensate for the lack of Rogue/x dps. Although, they still might be missing non-dps Rogue Utilities.
I feel like it's a pointless discussion in general, go play any group pvp that uses the holy trinity and you'll quickly notice the supports are the ones who carry the fights. NW is this way. if you go into group pvp and your side lacks heals you die almost instantly but with healers you sustain. too many healers and not enough dps on both sides everything turns into a good 3~5 minute brawl until people peal off and take down the healers.
So far it seems like There are no Cleanse skills. So some sleep skills used on a healer could make the difference. Also Fighter's bleed will reduce healing done + reduce dmg mitigation. So i doubt stacking healers will be as effective. Especially since fighter class will be really popular (or at least i expect it to be).
0.8x8 is the same thing as 0.8 + 0.8 + 0.8 + 0.8 + 0.8 + 0.8 + 0.8 + 0.8
Again, you did not indicate stacking abilities. Which is more than that sum.
Also it would be 0.8x8 is greater than 1.
But, you still have to factor in stacking bonuses, rather than just adding x/Rogue 8 times.
(or x/Tank 8 times)
Nah, I figured out what happened here, it was just a silly misunderstanding. I said two or MAYBE three tanks because I was theorycrafting the possible results of a buff Nikr was talking about (he made some good points tho). This isn't something I believe in or am attached to, it was just me basically trying to figure out how it might all look, because we still don't know how Intrepid plans to approach party buffs.
So, it is now very clear to me you still expect parties to have 1 or 0 tanks, thank you. I don't immediately disagree OR agree with this. My position is very simply that I can't yet figure out how Intrepid is planning to make Tanks and Bards both useful and fun to play with the current setup (mobility and TTK wise). You could for example turn them into buffbots but is it also fun?
What I'm trying to say is that Summoner is going to inherit any and all issues of the classes whole role they overlap with (even a bit). If the Tank struggles to roadblock a highly mobile target, so will the Summoner/their pet. If a Bard's buffs don't get to make enough difference because the fight is already over, so will the Summoner's. And so on.
If you disagree, that's fine, but I'd love an explanation why. Because depending on that, Summoner can either end up overshadowing other classes or being overshadowed by them.
Edit: Fixed weird quote stuff.
It might be 10-15 seconds based on group combat because they said the game would be balanced around groups so the time to kill he gave might be in a 8v8 situation not a 1v1 situation.
10-15 second TTK sounds about right to me from a pvp perspective tbh
also TTK times tend to be based on hitting somone who just standing there and not doing anything to defend themselfs acting like a dummy. So in actual fights it would probaly be quite a bit longer
I'm actually really encouraged by the number of people who have this 'reframing of what Steven said' as their response to this topic, since it implies a lot about what the response will be in Alpha-2.
I also see a benefit in the fact that it creates one of those situations where Intrepid can change something and then 'quietly pretend this is what Steven meant all along' if necessary, but on the other hand, this is also one of those situations where, if it did change due to feedback, it would be a good thing to talk about as proof of their willingness to listen to feedback.
So now u are at the point about saying i know the game better than him, what I'm saying is you guys have no clue what you are talking about. When are you going to realize your bias is stretching what he is saying and you literally are not MAKING any point and every thing you are saying holds 0 weight.
I can't believe i need to go over every detail in the video because you don't have a point so you are trying to make things up in your head so complain about ttk. This could be a long post because honestly the BS you guys are bringing up needs to stop.
Instantly you can see the ttk he is talking about is between various classes and longer kill times directed at tank vrs tank and cleric vrs cleric. It is EXTREMELY CLEAR he is talking about 1v1 situations and certain ones with his comment as well.
He does on to say the faster times would be dps against DPS, which you can look at the 10-15 ttk he was talking about.
Your point here that he is talking about different team comps, defensive skill trees, heavy kiting, generals support, etc. Is made up fantasy, you are doing this because you do not have a point and are trying to make up a issue to support your non existent argument
Now you are using this quote and mixing it up with his previous take about group play and that they planned for it with TTK (10-15 15-30) that is incorrect. His comment here only relates to that if you are doing group or RAID calling (which means a lot of people) multiple DPS can focus someone and kill them quickly. You have 0 context or knowledge of the actually game (as you have not played the GAME) on how that is going to work and amount of DPS you need to do that.
On top of that you do not have context for different situation in the game, this is what i talk about when im mentioning waves. There can be gaps or changes to take a opportunity for your advantage to kill people. This exist pretty much ALL games in relation to pvp to varying extents. A tank might not be guarding someone, or not using a skill and its easier to kill them. Where if the tank had the skill on it wouldn't be as easy to do that.
Steven is not giving a detailed breakdown here on fights nor should he, when you have been given a little information and you are trying to be like mr fantastic and stretch it.
Just going to say where when he is talking about skill is is in relation to both team play and individual skill. Which means there is a skill ceiling for players to use and be more effective or be less effective. IE like i keep saying that some people will know how to survive longer but also prevent people from doing that.
Honestly stop the cap on this "You know the game better than steven" I'm not even going to say i know the game better than you guys are making these bad takes as it isn't about having a legitime conversation. But just a outlet for you to complain because its not your style. You want to feel in your heart you are right to give you fuel as you use a mix of truth and falsities to give you the fuel to keep going.
because you kept saying steven was referring to 8 men groups, not raid groups T_T
ah ok got it ;3
summoner could or could not have those problems though. for example, if the summoner places a bunch of dots on you, then even if you dash away and the summoner cant catch you, you would still die. we have to wait and see its kit xD
I never said I was more right. You can look at Mag's posts and compare them to mine and then tell me, whose posts sound more like "I KNOW I'M RIGHT AND YOU'RE DEFINITELY WRONG AND HAVE NO FUCKING CLUE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT"
You are free to respond, it is never to late to walk back on some of the points you have been saying. As I've clearly pointed out the exaggeration / falseness.
Which means you should be more positive about it regardless, well unless its not about skill / knowledge to improving your situation with ttk and just about them making it a flat higher number.
Hm, not quite. From the perspective of 'will it be good', that's not really as big a deal as one other pretty big thing here.
If the line on the Wiki that said "Ashes of Creation will have a 30-60 second TTK" had instead, from the beginning, been 'Ashes of Creation will have a TTK that is a bit faster than most MMOs you're probably used to', a LOT of people who are here now would not be here.
Would there be different people? Maybe.
But it's up to Intrepid (and I guess you and I, to some extent) to convince people this can actually be good given everything.
Problem is, I don't really have much evidence to give, and you're not one for giving it.
This entire thread I've been saying "dps vs dps is 10-15s", "tanks/healers are ~30s" (and I even said that "it might not even be tank vs tank", cause Steven's wording there is more vague than in other parts), "group pvp will be killing people in 1s, as signified by Steven snapping his fingers", "when Steven is talking about group pvp he accounts for any of Intrepid's future plans for its balancing, which would include any potential defensive and offensive buffs/effects".
That's it. Unless you point to where I said "1v1 pvp is about both people being supported by other players" - I don't know what else I can say to make you see that I'm literally repeating what Steven said and saying "I don't like/want this design".
Kind of hard to debate what will feel good (until we play), at this point it really is about preferences. I'm not saying he should want a different preference, but the idea is that the times can be longer if you are skilled. Which if one wants longer ttk that is a good thing.
You are right in the fact different people enjoy different things. So messaging can draw different people, but it is development so nothing is really set in stone that early. For me i understand that both for things I like and don't liek and expect changes (ie i dont agree with mass res, i made my point. But devs plan to have it in some form so ill play it and then give more feed back after).
My main issue as i said in my post was this information going around that the devs have planned for the combat, group compositions, player itemization and skill kits, universal defense skill tree (in development) and saying the ttk is based off all that and will only be 10-15. Which was clearly not true based off the exact quotes i pulled.
People should like what they like though, but I feel the main core of people won't say anything until they see the game in a more complete state. But know knows maybe alpha 2 will start to draw in more people to start talking on reddit / discords.
Steven has stated about being coordinated and targeting someone you will be able to kill them. It is reasonable to believe with larger sizes you won't need to be as coordinated do to all the dmg output 9but could have a lot more deaths in the process of it on your own side).
Again this is where the issue is and why i feel you should be walking that back. You can't make a statement all future designs will be like x and X. If a tank uses a skill to buff you while you are using defensive skills and have a defensive build up, that doesn't mean you are going to die instantly.
For the game to account for all that you would have to be dying in 1-2 hits without any buffs / build support. There is going to be points based on your kit where you will be more empowered and do to being able to dodge some attacks, negate all dmg completely. If there is a skill ceiling that means there is a certain amount of leeway for players to not just die instantly and be able to react in a raid setting.
If we are talkin about a 8v8 group setting we have to look at all the skills that can help kite, cc, increase defense, heal, etc. That would be the most honest disccusion as you can know somewhat of the upper level on survivability.
Ie if a dps is coming for someone and they get their dmg reduced by 30%, and the target they are attacking is having a defensive buff and heals. What is the dmg that dps is doing for the TTk at that point. if it takes the DPS 5-7 seconds longer to be able to kill the person (is that dps the dps is attacking now suddenly has a 20 sec ttk) and now he gets cc'd and is kited, what is the life of the target do to the heals is he back at full now. This kinds of things need to be kept in mind when you are talking about ttk and how it feels. And what it means about coordination and of course it can go the other way with good attacks setting themselves up..
If he did jump from 1v1 pvp all the way up to "a full raid targeting a single player" - I'm somewhat fine that, but then we'd need to talk about aoe scaling, and that's a whole different discussion that has already happened in the past.
But if he did mean party vs party when he said "group pvp" - then I'd prefer if ttk was longer. Mainly because there's 2 ways to take his ttk timings:
- the target stands around doing nothing
- the target uses everything in their toolkit to avoid dying
If 10-15 ttk is in the context of the first option - it means that a dps class dies in around 5-10 damaging abilities, purely on hp values (this estimate is based on average cast times shown on streams). This then implies that a party of people can use all their best damaging abilities at once and wipe a target "in a snap".This was my reasoning behind believing that Steven was talking about party pvp when he said group, and not "a raid is attacking a single person".
Now if we look at the second option - things are WAAAAY worse. Because now the target is moving and using defensive abilities - AND IT'S STILL A 10-15s TTK. This means that the hp values of that target are below the floor, which means that direct-damage's worth of ttk is probably like 4-5s.
And if THAT is the case - a party can wipe 2 people in a snap, if they get the jump on them.
Depraved and a few other people believe that Steven was talking about the first option (I don't remember which one you believe, cause this has been a long convo). And as I described above, Steven's "snap" still aligns with "a party targeting a single player in the enemy party" situation, and not just a "raid doing the same" one.
As for big defensive buffs or strong healing, that can supposedly save that single player - these would, first of all, only work if the defending side saw the attackers coming, but would also depend on what other tools the attackers have. Due to us not knowing any of those tools, I've been talking about attackers getting a jump on their target (which is usually the healer) and killing it "in a snap".
And I've already given my suggestion for how this perceived issue could be addressed and also gave my reasoning for seeing it as an issue (namely my L2 experience of healers "being snapped"). If you believe that Intrepid will go away from this "snapping" design and add defensive tools that prevent it - cool, you agree with me.
But this belief goes directly against what Steven has stated, which is why it's funny that you seem to agree with Steven, while disagreeing with me. If you think he was only talking about a "raid attacking a single target" - we'll just have to disagree on that interpretation.
bruh. 5-10 abilities, that's 5 -10 players to evaporate the target. even if everyone in the party attacked at the same time, you would only have 8 people attacking (also I highly doubt its 5 abilities). but anyway, how often are you going to get hit by the cleric, the bard, the tank, the summoner, the ranger, the mage, the rogue and the warrior at the exact same time? that means you would literally need to be in melee range of a full party to die that quick, so even with a higher ttk, you will most likely not survive anyways. and they would still need to click and hit f1 at the exact same time. if someone is a second late, you get healed.
that also means all the supports stopped supporting and started dpsing. if you only count the dps in the party (4) that's four abilities. you have time to get healed or do something, and that's if you are a squishy dps in melee range. you also have to consider that you might need to set up your powerful skills using normal attack combos, like make your target bleed to increase your backstab damage, etc. i doubt people will die in the blink of an eye in 8v8. they might die after the kill has been set up, which might take more than 10-15 seconds.
I highly doubt that will see people of equal level and gear getting one shotted by a single coordinated F1 of 4 people in a party vs party. when you add a second, a third or even a fourth party, etc. that will happen for sure. but not in 8v8
So far we've seen that mages/healers are at lower hp values than melee chars (~1k compared to 1.5k). Leveling higher obviously gives more hp (lvl25 mage from the last showcase had 3k hp), but I'd assume that damage increases with lvl as well, so the only assumption I can make here is that ttk will remain similar (or potentially that is the exact ttk Steven was talking about).
Snipe from the caravan showcase did almost 400 dmg to a tank. Steven was lvl25 there (against assumedly lvl15 people), so let's assume it does 200 at lvl15 (everyone else in Steven's party did ~400, so I assume they were lvl25s too). At 200 dmg, that's 1/8 of a tank's hp and 1/5 of a healer's.
I'd imagine a strong long cast mage nuke has a similar dmg value. A rogue attack from stealth could potentially do even more, but let's say it's the same, but it obviously requires being in melee (but we have stealth). So even in these assumptions, that's already 3/5 of a healer's hp from just 3 dps characters.
I'd assume cleric/summoner/bard/tank can all use some ranged attack (either ability or bow) and warrior could be the first one to initiate into a stun synergy with a relatively low dmg value. Even if bow shots + stun do ~200 collective dmg - the stun would still provide just enough time to finish off the healer "in a snap".
And again, this is not counting any potential dps augments or cleric/bard/summoner having range abilities that are stronger than a simple bow shot.
Any potential buffs from either side can be disregarded cause they either balance each other out, or Steven took them into account when giving his timings.
To me this sounds like the most basic optimal surprise attack on an enemy party. I've seen COUNTLESS such attacks in L2 by archer/mage parties. Hell, even dagger parties did this through stealth. And all of what I said was in the context of an "one of each" party composition and not any potentially more dpsey setups of "as many archers as you can get".
So again, this was my thought process behind believing that Steven meant "party vs party".
The point I'm trying to drive home is its not white or black there is grey area in the game. They have a average ttk they are aiming for with general balancing, but skill and party composition is going to affect that as well. You need to accept that is going to be playing a role and they can't just give a exact answer for that because its impossible.
A rough attacking another rouge but one as the armour type to counter them but in physcial and element, and whatever effect will naturally do much less dmg. We need to accept the fact that we can't say they are saying players are using everything in their kit that is not possible. You aren't going to be expected to have everytinhg all the time as an average, you aren't also going to have every single party composition or piece of gear on you, nor is every opponent going to land every hit or account for you dodging skills. It is not realistic of you to expect that kind of answer even more so during development hence you won't get a answer for that. Again there is going to be tons of grey space.
To the comment about Steven talking about focusing people, id agree as those are his words and intent for the game. But as i said before CONTEXT matters, who is in your comp, do you notice them or some of your team, are you CD's on or off, your builds etc. If you are caught off guard and not using any skills ya you will end up dying, if you see them and you are skilled you might be able to reserve the situation and out play them. If you are bad and can't react and turn buffs, skills, etc on then you might get thanos snapped ya.
I feel the intent is for outplaying people, catching them off guard, etc. Its not 2 groups fighting each other and snapped instantly, you has to be a level of skill there from a side to do it. That is the most reasonable line of thinking if u are talking about that type of content.
Yes we don't know the tools but i expect there to be plenty of tools on both sides, and why situational awareness is important, as well as positioning. It opens up the room to be able to make big plays when it comes to pvp..
I view things from a pvp mind set on how I'd see things going based on my pass experiences. So when i hear certain things like snapped I'm going to ask how that would happen in an actual engagement. On top of my belief people are going to be able to have a chance to react (but that is also a grey area). If you get caught off guard and let a group of 4 people freely buff up and target you and take out your healer, than its not looking for for your group. You need to be able to react just as quickly as you are getting attacked, even if you get caught off guard you should know what their plan would be and who you need to protect.
Ie instant buff team, instant cc them them, make distance if possible, etc. Again if you don't have situational awareness and 4 dps can jump your cleric at the same time i don't know what to say.
*Edit caravan showcase did not show the universal defense tree, that is going to be something people will not be sleeping on (except for glass cannons)
Could see things liek reduce dmg first hit, reduced CC time, greatly reduced first hit cc time, buffs while dodging and blocking, hp barrier and low hp, etc. Also armour types and magic protects are going to be a big deal and setting up your kit.
It's the same "skill" you've been talking about. Executing a good ambush requires good knowledge of the surroundings and of the enemy's movement.
And in the case of ambushes the attackers always have an advantage (cause that's the entire point), so even if the fighting skill might be higher on the defending side - the ambushers could still come out on top.
And if those things exist - cool. But then Steven's words would be a lie, or, even worse, they'd mean that nothing is fucking planned and he's just winging it all. I try to believe that there's at least some form of plan for their design and that Steven is presenting their plans for balancing that design. And this belief requires me to think that Steven accounts for any potential builds when talking about averages.
They've been designing, discussing and internally testing all the things they've talked about, so if they have no idea of what those plans can result in - we have a much bigger problem on our hands than "ttk is short".
It really doesn't mean he is lying it be you looking for a reasoning to find that to be true. This is a mmorpg with a lost of customization and builds with what we have been seeing so far. Steven had answered on again average players. You can not hear something being said and think there is no flexibility when the game has customization. You were not given a answer for all situations, the sooner you let that go the better off you will be.
They have a goal and that is what they are aiming for, it doesn't mean it is the be all end all. It also doesn't mean because you have defensive options you can survive for for extended period of time of being attacked without some element of skill.
But as i said about waves and such, you will have instances of advantage that will help protect you in different situations, and allow you to be able to react.
MMorpgs are not easy to be made, id be a bit more chill on the armchair game deving. I'm sure there goal is testing things making sure it feels fun with guesses for balance which than they will be fine tuning things. As i said before you are expecting them to know exactly how everything is going to go, it really is not that easy. Classes, augments, gearing, class skill trees, weapon skill trees, defense skill tress it isn't that simple....On top of all the people they have working on things its not all coming from one person, you can't account for everything you are being way too harsh. They legit are just trying to make a fun game. And i wouldn't say they are winging it, they are developing.