Greetings, glorious testers!

Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.

To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.

Misses, resists and other combat RNG

SpifSpif Member, Alpha Two
What are people's thought on the topic of RNG in combat?

1) My impression is that there will be no RNG misses or resists of damaging attacks. Same goes for effects from attacks like DoTs, CC or debuffs. If someone sends it your way, and you don't have a specific effect that keeps from landing, it's going to stick. You may be able to reduce the damage with resists/armor stats, but it won't just be completely nullified. I bring that up because after the mage preview I've been seeing a lot of comparisons to systems where you just stack resists to a specific element to not get hit by it.

2) RNG blocks, dodges or parries. My understanding is that the default level of evade/block/parry will be 0%. I don't think we've seen anything official related to this from the Devs other than active block showcased in the tank preview. There are a lot of options .Tank and rogue are the most likely classes to have something like this. Either as a passive X% chance to block/evade damage, or as an active buff that gives an X% chance. But since all classes could have rogue/tank/other

#1: IMO for a modern MMO, RNG missing/resists are not needed. It's just too huge of a benefit for an attack to completely miss, especially in a cooldown based system.

For #2, I'm also not a fan of anything passive. But a moderate-to-long-cooldown RNG-based defensive buff would be ok (Ex: gain 30% evade chance for the next 5 seconds). Even better would be a cooldown based buff that negates the next attack against you. I'm more interested in having active block or iframes incorporated into the dodge roll
«134

Comments

  • LudulluLudullu Member, Alpha Two
    I personally like rng in both of those. But rng based on the stat difference between the attacker and defender. And people would be able to make builds that address those differences. A mage has high WIS stat that lets them resist majority of poisons? Boost your INT in response and get a buff that boosts poison effect chance.

    Stuff like that. And the same applies to physical interactions as well. Perfect blocks and dodges should still be in the game, but they gotta be real tight, so that they're a real skill check (well, of course as long as the ping is accounted for).
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Hate it, but I think Ashes is pretty dead set on it.

    I can manage when it's not binary, i.e. Random chance for shorter duration CC instead of CC misses, or random chance to deal lower damage (I'm more ok with it for crits and damage in longer TTK games).

    But that's just a matter of 'coinflips and dicerolls' vs 'statistics'. The sweet spot in an MMO is probably the point where the 'streak of bad' is enough of an outlier that it won't usually ruin a gameplan, but I find this to be harder to reach in PvP situations.
    ♪ One Gummy Fish, two Gummy Fish, Red Gummy Fish, Blue Gummy Fish
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    I love the devs idea of input rng but I'm not a fan of output rng.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    I kind of enjoy rng in combat though it makes it hard to do proper combo set up. Granted the goal is to try to stun and blow someone up with as much dmg as possible.

    In a game with large fights and many players there should be ways to control the effects of cc on you and the chance. Normally I'll say it needs to be balanced for it so that you can have less cc around but make the current cc more reliable over rng.

    But I'm unsure the correct decision until i see more of the game and how their goals will work out.

    Maybe a mix of some non rng cc and some cc that is rng.
  • SolvrynSolvryn Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    I don’t mind reductions, but passive RNG is garbage. Perfect block/Dodge Roll/ Evade is the way to go.

  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    RNG is fine imo, as long as the systems behind it are fairly open.

    Having a log of the rolls the combat system takes, along with a list of modifiers (basically the same info you have in tabletop D&D), then all is well.

    Going to attack someone and missing can be frustrating. Seeing that you rolled a 1 vs their roll of 100 though, that makes it a little easier to digest.
  • tautautautau Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    I'm fine with RNG.

    Perhaps the greatest weakness of using a RNG is people often (or should I say 'usually') misunderstanding statistics. This leads to complaining and whining which is unpleasant. But there are lots of unpleasant reactions from the player base and it is unrealistic to expect that not to happen.

    So use the RNGs but, as Noaani just said, let the systems behind it be fairly open.
  • Ace1234Ace1234 Member
    I hate rng for anything other than mixing up how situations are presented to the player to create a dynamic experience. Put the power in the player's hands and let rng naturally occur from the nuances of human limitations and skill differences.
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    We could moved around attacks in a1 rather than having rng which was very good. I hope the devs iterate on that aspect and maintain the dynamics. Input rng is fine but output rng sucks.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • FantmxFantmx Member, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    I am fine with rng being part of the equation however as character skill increases rng should decrease.
    q1nu38cjgq3j.png
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Fantmx wrote: »
    I am fine with rng being part of the equation however as character skill increases rng should decrease.

    I sort of agree with this, but most games do this as a matter of course.

    An example is that as your character progresses, their chance to hit would go up. New abilities and gear would just naturally increase it. As your chance to hit goes up, your reliance on RNG naturally goes down.
  • daveywaveydaveywavey Member, Alpha Two
    I hate RNG. It just feels like they haven't been able to design a fully working system when they have to resort to RNG. It's just sloppy. Lots of modern board-games are moving away from dice for that very reason.
    This link may help you: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/


    giphy-downsized-large.gif?cid=b603632fp2svffcmdi83yynpfpexo413mpb1qzxnh3cei0nx&ep=v1_gifs_gifId&rid=giphy-downsized-large.gif&ct=s
  • LodrigLodrig Member
    Basic attacks should absolutely have a chance to hit/miss driven by character stats and appropriate environmental conditions. Ranged attacks in particular need a distance component so that retreating is an at least partial defense. Basic attacks are going to be numerous enough that hits and misses would rapidly average out and act as a defacto damage reduction for the target which is appropriate if they have created conditions for misses via stats or battlefield tactics.

    Mana consuming abilities be they AOE's or singularly targeted probably should NOT miss or have an RNG component in their damage or debuff effects as the expenditure of limited resources should give reliability for the user and the nature of such abilities many complex effects can not be averaged out easily.
  • BaSkA_9x2BaSkA_9x2 Member, Alpha Two
    edited May 2023
    I am not a fan of RNG in combat. Something I dislike is having different damage dealt by the same player to the same target using the same skill or basic attack. In other words, very simplified just to make a point, taking no dodges/misses/resists/etc. into account: if a player yielding a sword with 100 attack attacks a target (another player or mob) that has 10 armor, I want the damage to be 90 every time I hit it, I wouldn't like to hit 82, then 94, then 87, then a 90.

    I can think of reasons to add RNG to this, but I would like to play an MMO where damage is the result of a mathematical calculation, no matter how complex or simple it may be, no need for a damage range (RNG) there.
    🎶Galo é Galo o resto é bosta🎶
  • FantmxFantmx Member, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    Fantmx wrote: »
    I am fine with rng being part of the equation however as character skill increases rng should decrease.

    I sort of agree with this, but most games do this as a matter of course.

    An example is that as your character progresses, their chance to hit would go up. New abilities and gear would just naturally increase it. As your chance to hit goes up, your reliance on RNG naturally goes down.

    Exactly, a natural progression of skill. As you become more adept with swordplay and combat you should have more control and less randomness.

    It also provides a feel of increasing power and gives players another goal to strive for.
    q1nu38cjgq3j.png
  • Ace1234Ace1234 Member
    edited May 2023
    Here is an interesting vid that for the most part sums up my feelings on the topic.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dwI5b-wRLic&t=229s&pp=ygUMR210dGsgcmFuZG9t
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Fantmx wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Fantmx wrote: »
    I am fine with rng being part of the equation however as character skill increases rng should decrease.

    I sort of agree with this, but most games do this as a matter of course.

    An example is that as your character progresses, their chance to hit would go up. New abilities and gear would just naturally increase it. As your chance to hit goes up, your reliance on RNG naturally goes down.

    Exactly, a natural progression of skill. As you become more adept with swordplay and combat you should have more control and less randomness.

    It also provides a feel of increasing power and gives players another goal to strive for.

    To me, games do an ok job of this naturally, as outlined above.

    The thing to remember, at least imo, is that the adverse of this also applies. As your opponents get better, that RNG creeps back in.

    This is where opposed rolls in MMOs come in. My chance to hit rolled against your chance to dodge, block or avoid.

    Sure, I've put all that time and effort in to increasing my chance to hit, but you have put that same amount of time in to increasing your chance to prevent me from hitting.

    What I will say is that games with this mechanic do also need non-RNG components to the system.

    In most games, this is things like added damage in the case of the attacker, and mitigation in the case of the defender.
  • VaknarVaknar Member, Staff
    In case you missed it, be sure to check out the Dev Discussion we did on RNG a year ago: https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/52481/dev-discussion-41-rng/p1

    Quite a few interesting opinions on the topic can be found there, as well!
    community_management.gif
  • FantmxFantmx Member, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    I definitely agree it should be a combination of RNG and non-RNG
    q1nu38cjgq3j.png
  • SpifSpif Member, Alpha Two
    Lodrig wrote: »
    Basic attacks should absolutely have a chance to hit/miss driven by character stats and appropriate environmental conditions. Ranged attacks in particular need a distance component so that retreating is an at least partial defense. Basic attacks are going to be numerous enough that hits and misses would rapidly average out and act as a defacto damage reduction for the target which is appropriate if they have created conditions for misses via stats or battlefield tactics.

    I don't think missing should be more prevalent for longer ranged attacks just so that retreating can be more successful. If the attacks are numerous enough that it rapidly averages out, this in essence becomes:

    Ranged attacks do less damage the further away you are from your target, due to misses. And I don't like that at all. It means ranged will always have to try to be as close as possible to deal full damage.
  • SolmyrSolmyr Member
    Autoattacks, RNG-based evades, and automatic blocking are the combat equivalent of autopathing.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Solmyr wrote: »
    Autoattacks, RNG-based evades, and automatic blocking are the combat equivalent of autopathing.

    I mean, this is a bad take.
  • edited May 2023
    Spif wrote: »
    What are people's thought on the topic of RNG in combat?

    1) My impression is that there will be no RNG misses or resists of damaging attacks. Same goes for effects from attacks like DoTs, CC or debuffs. If someone sends it your way, and you don't have a specific effect that keeps from landing, it's going to stick. You may be able to reduce the damage with resists/armor stats, but it won't just be completely nullified. I bring that up because after the mage preview I've been seeing a lot of comparisons to systems where you just stack resists to a specific element to not get hit by it.

    2) RNG blocks, dodges or parries. My understanding is that the default level of evade/block/parry will be 0%. I don't think we've seen anything official related to this from the Devs other than active block showcased in the tank preview. There are a lot of options .Tank and rogue are the most likely classes to have something like this. Either as a passive X% chance to block/evade damage, or as an active buff that gives an X% chance. But since all classes could have rogue/tank/other

    #1: IMO for a modern MMO, RNG missing/resists are not needed. It's just too huge of a benefit for an attack to completely miss, especially in a cooldown based system.

    For #2, I'm also not a fan of anything passive. But a moderate-to-long-cooldown RNG-based defensive buff would be ok (Ex: gain 30% evade chance for the next 5 seconds). Even better would be a cooldown based buff that negates the next attack against you. I'm more interested in having active block or iframes incorporated into the dodge roll

    In the 1°) point, what gives you the impression that "There will be no RNG misses or resists of damaging attacks. Same goes for effects from attacks like DoTs, CC or debuffs." and your understanding that "the default level of evade/block/parry will be 0%."?

    My Expectations, impression and understanding is the complete opposite of yours because things present in Alpha 1:

    Physical Disable Modifier
    Physical Disable Defense
    Physical Accuracy
    Physical Evasion Bonus
    Physical Block Chance
    Magical Disable Chance
    Magical Accuracy
    Magical Block Chance

    All of those Stats were derived from from Base Stats. https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Stats

    Also, the main games Ashes gets inspirations from (Lineage 2 and ArcheAge) and such RNG variables inside their combat.

    As for what are my thoughts on the topic of RNG in combat,
    i believe RNG is essential for having a combat system with depth in terms of unpredictability and adaptability skill, those aspects certainly provides me with extra enjoyment.

    RNGless combat feels way less entertaining for me due to how much more predictable it often is, it feels limited, static and souless for me.

    I Believe RNG in Ashes will have an extra importance to keep Tab Target Skills in check other than small i-frames defensive options. Being able to evade/block/parry otherwise unavoidable(by simple movement) Tab Target Skills and the possible Debuffs/CCs attached to them (Which would be an insane advantage over Action skills even tho we know most CC is expected to be house in Action skills).
    6wtxguK.jpg
    Aren't we all sinners?
  • LodrigLodrig Member
    Spif wrote: »
    I don't think missing should be more prevalent for longer ranged attacks just so that retreating can be more successful. If the attacks are numerous enough that it rapidly averages out, this in essence becomes:

    Ranged attacks do less damage the further away you are from your target, due to misses. And I don't like that at all. It means ranged will always have to try to be as close as possible to deal full damage.

    Without a range drop off the ranged attacker will always attack at maximum range instead. Most ranged attackers will be trying to avoid melee attacks from their targets aka kiting, so they already have an incentive to maintain distance from the target no matter what their damage output is. By varying damage output an actual risk-reward tradeoff is created for both the sides.
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Rangers can't shoot within 5 meters. Wanting to gimp them at range too will destroy the class.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • LodrigLodrig Member
    Neurath wrote: »
    Rangers can't shoot within 5 meters. Wanting to gimp them at range too will destroy the class.

    It may come as a surprise to you but them exists an entire genre of games which involve shooting other players which would let us test your theory, invariably the farther away the other players are in these games the harder it is to shoot them.

    Ultimately just making an assumption that balance will be bad. I haven't spoken at all about what the maximum range or damage of an arrow should be.
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Some games increase damage at max range. The point remains that rangers are already gimped in close combat and don't need to be gimped at max range. Normalised damage would be enough.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • LodrigLodrig Member
    We're talking about chance to hit here, not damage, no game makes the chance to hit higher at longer range.

    Again, your just making unfounded assumption at best and bad faith arguments at worst. Maximum range is not a fixed immovable value, nor is an arrows base damage value. Both could go up such that DPS could be nearly any value. I'm simply asserting that a downward sloping curve on a range/DPS plot is what is needed to provide a good counter play for and against the Ranger.
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Longbow range in real life is 300m. Ranger can fire 50 to 75 meters. I think its fine to have full operation at 50 to 75 meters. There is already action shots which can miss at any range, there is no reason to add miss chance at max range when it already exists at any range. Furthermore, some even want to add rng into the mix which I disagree with.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • LodrigLodrig Member
    edited May 2023
    Your inability to interpret my statements as anything OTHER then a pure nerf applied as a last step on top of existing gameplay is becoming tiresome. The TOTAL miss chance could very well be 0% out to 50 meters and then increases 1% per meter after that with a 150m maximum range where your misses reach 100%.

    The fact that miss chance currently exists at all ranges, and which is presumably a flat chance is exactly the OPPOSITE of what I'm calling for because that is a flat DPS/range curve. Miss chances should be near zero at close range and with the max range just being the point when miss chance has reach sufficiently close to 100% that their is no more point in firing.

    BtW, 300m was range for mass area bombardment by archers firing in arcs, ranges to shoot man size targets were far less, though obviously Fantasy settings and Elves claim to fame is inhuman accuracy which is why you want a Dex stat or something similar to be used in the range-increment calculation so you can build a character for accuracy.
Sign In or Register to comment.