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.
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.
Comments
I want my rotation to be a mix of both, auto-attacks should really be spammable abilities that you use during the downtime after using your big abilities. Additionally they can act as resource builders, where they either fill up your class resource bar, or just restore hp/mana on hit with certain classes/builds. BUT, they absolutely shouldn't be as clunky as light/heavy attacks in ESO, where weaving attacks is a thing. They should just be an ability on your skillbar, that's basic in what it does, and that is spammable (uses low/no mana, virtually no cooldown, but also doesn't deal a lot of damage by itself).
They shouldn't be overdone, to the point that you end up always having to spam them in between, and if you don't time your rotation correctly, you're losing tons of dps. That means that you have to make a conscious decision on whether you want to spam the basic attack, or use another ability. Maybe you want to build up a resource bar, or you want to apply certain status effect based on your weapon, so you would spam the basic attack for a bit longer before using other abilities. Or, you want to use your other abilities to do more damage, to cc, or whatever else, rather than spamming your basic attack. It should be a decision, not a requirement to always have to spam the basic attack.
I would also like a system, where the weapon you're using actually matters.
For example, auto-attacks with an Axe could proc bleeding. A 2H Axe shouldn't be a weapon with fast attack speed, which should reflect on how fast you can spam the auto attack ability (now whether the duration of the animation should be adjusted, or the cooldown of the attack itself, I don't know yet).
A dagger should have way faster attack speed than a 2H Axe, and that should be reflected by a more "spammable" basic attack.
However, I do not want something akin to GW2, where your weapon completely replaces your skills. Or at least I don't want it done that way. I'd like to actually be able to select my skills, instead of them being preselected, based on the weapon. Speaking of GW2, please no piano rotations that are always the same and that require you to perfectly time one ability after another in order to maximize the dps.
I'd also like certain abilities to maybe have different effects, based on the weapon equipped, so not just basic attacks. Something like an AoE Fighter ability, that can apply different procs depending on weapon equipped, or even having piercing, slashing, blunt damage on the ability.
AoC class wish: https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/comment/422108#Comment_422108
1st and foremost, i think more importantly the classes and augment "potentials" should be figured out to some degree. depending on that it can greatly skew the balance of the basic attacks mechanic.
afterwards, you can go back and forth with how it all works.
that being said and you opening this can of worms..
2ndly. i don't think auto-attacks should be in the game, its a step away from afk gaming and it breaks immersion.
also as someone who enjoys hands on combat and fluidity in my combos. i think having at least 3 forms of basic attacks that A> can weave together. and B> share a cooldown with one another. would be the best scenario for your game.
players then can decide if they want strictly a slash combo, stab combo, or a smash combo or combine them however they see fit.
this example only applies to melee but this can extend to ranged and casters.
for casters you can have a single orb combo, barrage of orb combo(that's susceptible to hitting objects) or a charged orb that has a minor degree of splash.
and ranged can offer a single strike, double strike, or a melee that creates distance.
these combos are all just examples but i think it gets my point across.
regardless i look forward to seeing the final results.
I would much rather have the first instance where the UI is easier to read and Procs are there for the dopamine hit.
I will start by saying I agree with some of your insight but unfortunately you lack diversity in your experience. Auto attacks have pros and cons true, but I think you miss some experience in other games and their use of basic attacks. In ESO for instance your basic attack/defense functions can be a quick click for a quick attack or quick block or you can hold down your basic attack button for a med-heavy attack that procs some gear functions and provides its own diverse flavor as part of a rotation. This happens as well with block quick block or hold down for bracing. then you can combine the two for a bash all part of the live action style fighting I have found to be one of my favorite styles of combat in MMO's. I have played more than a dozen extensively including wow and FF as well. these attack and def functions are an extended and expanded style that works in with the skill attacks you can weave them into each other as part of your overall fighting strategy rather than limiting yourself to a narrow rotation. So far with Ashes and its display of combat functions it is not impressive nor does it offer anything new or innovative, its your basic lock target tab through to switch targets throw in some aoe's figure out your skill abilities and line them up to make the most sense then rotate based on the length of cooldowns rinse and repeat. But of course I hope to be proven wrong here. I just prefer more of a manual control fast action style combat system. But in the system that I see ashes is using an auto attack makes sense here.
Pardon me if this feels like an attack on you but it seems like you want to be world class combatant status handed to you. One or two skills you can spam and not require learned personal gamer skill? The method you describe exists in every game but only takes you so far you will be average and that's ok and rightfully so. You want to be a star player you need to be learned and put in the effort just like anyone else. But from what I see in Ashes I believe that the people that don't care to put in that time an effort to be top pvper can still make a difference as a member of a larger group and leave the stardom to those who have worked to deserve it. Find your role and be ok with it or work to change it should be up to you but don't ask the game to create mechanics to cater to you please.
the problem with low CD skills is they become the spam as games tend to offer gear or other ability modifiers that lower the CD to almost become instant. And spamming the nuke skill becomes a game breaking issue. I suppose if I were asked how to prevent this kind of spam Id say increase the cost of casting the ability if it is cast twice within a certain timeframe?
IMO auto attacks:
* Should be triggered by the player and have an animation time/GCD
* Should not cost resources
* Should deal significant damage, as they do cost time. But less than abilities, as they don't cost resources
* Should have the option of causing an effect at the cost of damage that is appropriate to the weapon. Ex: one type of shortbow's auto attacks does do low damage but cause a short 20% snare. Another type of shortbow's auto attack has no CC but does normal damage. Each weapon should have at least one optional effect (IE: dagger-bleed, hammers-damage debuff)
* I'd like to see long-charge heavy auto attacks, but that you can release mid charge for less damage. This is to avoid being animation locked for 2 seconds. Possibly AE auto-attacks would be gated behind heavy attacks?
Do you want your rotation to be mostly abilities, or do you want to have auto-attacks be important in your rotation?
I want to be able to build for either, or 50-50. And there are many ways to do that:
* A high burst, burn all your mana build. Then auto to regen
* A high mana efficiency build that spams skills with little autoing
* Builds that uses on-next-auto attack powerups
* An option to be highly mobile during auto-attacks
* Build options where you have to pay attention to procs, and land an auto during the proc window for extra damage/effect
* Build options where you have mini-rotations that incorporate auto attacks. IE, skill1->auto->skill2. All 3 have to hit in that order, for bonus damage/effect on skill 2
* Options for auto-attacks to have a chance to reset a cooldown
And combinations of the above for good buildcrafting
It is no longer possible to judge the combat system based on anything in Alpha-1, since it was heavily changed at the end of Alpha-1, even, and some iterations we've seen since then have removed or disqualified perceptions that would have come from Alpha-1.
Certain bugfixes also changed the combat significantly.
Right now, AoC is definitely not a hybrid and more of a Tab+ system with the soft-locking camera option. With that in mind, your options are to either have players spam the same basic attack button frequently between their more engaging abilities, or accept that you really don't have anywhere near enough action combat in your game to call it a hybrid, realize that players' basic attacks won't have any real strategy involved in their execution, and make part of your combat automated in order to save your players the trouble of doing the robotic parts of your combat system themselves.
The only times doing basic attacks on my own feels fun for me is if it's real time action combat and I have to actually aim, time, and maneuver intelligently to get the maximum impact on my basic attacks, or if it's turn based combat like in BG3 where every ability can have a large impact, and sometimes all it takes is 2-3 basic attacks as a melee character to down an enemy.
1. Clarifying the difference between basic attacks vs auto attacks
- auto-attacks happen automatically without any inputs and generally lack any skillfull timing
- basic attacks require manual inputs and require more thoughful timing and execution
- Based on this its possible to have both basic attacks and auto attacks within a combat sytem, by having auto attacks that are happening autonomously and simultaneously alongside your manually inputed attacks.
2. Auto attacks:
If its done right, auto attacks can be a good way of fine-tuning your build to provide additional passive effects that supplement your active decisions. Similar to how Warframe does it with their pets, how you can have a pet over your shoulder that has different abilities, and the pet performs them on your own while you fight. These can be very beneficial and fun, especially if you can manage how your pet prioritizes using these different abilities (which you can do in Warframe by slotting the abilities on your pet in a certain order)
3. Defining rotations
A) situational and organic sequences
(sequences based on situational responses, organic and dynamic sequences driven by the context of the fight, These types of rotational sequences are generally referred to as "strings" in fighting games.)
-I enjoy these types of rotations more and prefer a plethora of these types of sequences and the combat tools that allow for them to happen, because they require reacting to the situation at hand to determine which skills you want to follow up with to create those organic sequences. They also require spacial awareness to determine which skills can reach at a given moment, so you need to react to the situation and use the correct skill for that situation based on various factors. Doing this in a faster paced combat flow is very fun because the element of surprise is an important aspect to be able to land these sequences on the opponent so they can't react after the decision-making stages have already occured.
- for example if you have a "jab" as a basic attack (something like a weak and fast strike of the fist/weapon), and you land that attack, it may knock the enemy away to a slightly further range, and due to the low endlag/high stun of the jab, the attacker can follow up with another attack before the defender can leave that range (but the defender can still act with a defensive option). This means the attacker can follow up with a longer reaching attack. If they land that attack it might knock them even further back, where the attacker can follow up with a ranged attack like a bow and arrow shot. This would all happen very quickly to result in a "string" of attacks (jab -->heavy attack-->bow shot) in an organic way as they react to the position of the enemy after each interaction. It isn't a guarenteed combo because the defender could have potentially blocked the earlier strikes to negate the damage, or used an attack of their own to challenge the attacker's attack, but it worked because of the context and situational skill usage. These interactions or "strings" are generally fun for both players, because the attacker is trying to keep the pressure up by following up each attack with another one, wheras the defender is looking for opportunities to reverse the roles through something like a "perfect block/parry" or a well placed attack of their own to begin their own chain of pressure, so these are very engaging and intense moments during a fight.
- I believe that is the point that Gemboj was getting at, but you can have organic and meaningful "rotational" sequences without reducing the amount of choices/options/skills which would gut the combat system.
B- guarenteed sequences
(guarenteed follow ups, standardized sequences, these types of rotational sequences are generally referred to as "true combos" in fighting games)
- I don't enjoy these as much and prefer a limited amount of these skills/sequences, mainly because it comes down to memorization and is also a form of "CC" where the opponent is basically helpess and relies on you "dropping your combo" rather than using counterplay. This can be fun and hype if done like Super Smash Bros, where you have guarenteed combos that are contextual and require reacting to the context during a fight (like how they have combos that only work at certain percentages on certain opponents and require certain combo starter attacks), but it would still needs to be limited and would require a healthy dose of execution skill in order to actually be interesting, which tends not to be common in mmos.
4. Basic attacks
A) Basic attacks should fulfill the role of low-risk rotational sequence starters
- Based on my preference of creating more organic rotational sequences, the basic attacks should come into play by being your main way at creating those opportunities and leading into those sequences. So from that perspective I think basic attacks should be essential for being as efficient as possible with your combat and with leading into rotations based on the situation. I think that basic attacks should be very low risk and versatile options, that allow you to both protect yourself and apply offensive pressure to the enemy in a low risk manner. This not only allows you to take initiative during combat and adds a skill ceiling by having to manage which types of attacks are best for a given situation, but it also provides players a reliable means of setting up for those rotational sequences, and requiring them to react and create their own rotational sequences as they adapt to what is going on after their initial strikes (such as whether or not the basic attack landed, where the enemy moved to since the basic attack was used, what the enemy tried to counter with after you used the basic attack, etc.).
- The point of having low risk options that naturally flows into higher risk options is that
this allows for skilled players who minimize risk to still be able to engage with the more satisfying powerful attacks in the kit by chaining them together as a part of those organic rotations, of which those players otherwise normally wouldn't use those risky skills "raw" (without setting up for them) due to the high risk. It also creates a skill gap between the efficient players who minimize risk to find setup opportunities for the rotations, and the lower skilled players who would try to use riskier options with less planning/strategy
B- Low-risk basic attack tools are necessary for "Neutral game", which make rotational sequences more hype
A big part of what makes organic rotational sequences fun, is what fighting games refer to as the "neutral game" during a fight, where there is a lot of tension between players in anticipation of who is going to land those key strikes that set up for a big chain reaction of following events. Based on this, players need to have tools for neutral game to defend, pressure, evade, and reposition, and adjust timings of their tools in order to have an effective neutral game. Having low-risk options such as basic attacks is a crucial part of that.
C) Some key elements of what makes something low risk
Here are some examples of how to provide some lower risk options that could be used in neutral game that could create opportunities to lead into organic rotational sequences:
- low relative endlag of a move when the player misses with that move (to provide a low/committment/safe option to "poke" at the enemy with and set up rotation opportunities without having to commit too much) but at the cost of slower startup speed or some other drawback
- very fast relative startup speed of a move when the attack is guarenteed to land at a given range (to provide a reliable tool when at that range, of which is difficult to counter when it is used correctly) but at the cost of higher endlag or some otber drawback
- can be done at different timings (such as canceling/quickening the cast timing, or having quick movement options that allow you to quicky and fluidly weave outside then back into that attack's range in order to use at a different timing
- has reliable hitbox priority, in other words the player can use the move as intended without having to worry about the opponent using something that will overpower it and create extra risk to the player
- is either competely unreactable, or cannot be distininguished between a different tool on reaction (such as the enemy reacting to you using an attack but not being able to react to which specific attack it is before its too late)- When the enemy can simply react to your tool and input the relevant counter-play in response, then it is generally a huge risk to use that option.
- etc.
D) Conclusion
Overall its generally necessary to have low-risk tools for:
1. defending
2. evading
3. pressuring (attacking the enemy, without much risk of retaliation, even if they defend against the attack)
4. reposition
5. timing mixup
Because these tools will help you in pretty much any situation you find yourself in, and this is very important for neutral game, and for providing options that can lead into subsequent options to form those organic rotational sequences. This could also mean that sometimes offense could be your best form of defense as well by having to rely on attacks as your primary low-risk situational tool, which would be healthy for the pacing and balance of combat.
Overall, basic attacks are generally a huge part of providing these tools, and I think these are important for creating a foundation for a fun neutral game that can lead into fun and organic rotational sequences.
- Based on the previous points, any good combat system has a variety of tools to deal with a variety of situations. That being said you want to have a spectrum of risk taking for each of those sitiations as well (such as having both a high risk/high reward option like a heavy slow strike, and a low risk/low reward option like a quick weak strike at that same range)
- Based on this I think the full breadth of the combat system and class kits should be leveraged to fullfill a large variety of these niche situational roles that call for low-risk/basic attack tools. That means weapon basic attacks, class ability basic attacks, combat pet basic attacks, mount basic attacks, basic low-risk evasion/defensive/movement skills, etc., and these should all be meaningful opportunities for players to react, then adapt to create organic rotational sequences as the circumstances demand.
Yes, it would be great to have a spectrum of risk/reward based attack types on weapons, such as low risk basic attacks, higher risk heavy attacks, as well as different ranges of attacks for each weapon, etc. Because these provide tools and options that can allow for more setup potential and opportunities for rotational sequences
As far as games that did it great, I can think of:
1. Super Smash Bros Melee, and Super Smash Bros Ultimate with their
A) organic sequences that players can create on the fly.
B- low risk options/basic attacks for "neutral game" setups (such as jabs, short hops, spotdodges, canceling out of shield, safe tilt/aerial attacks, etc.)
2. Crosscode with its low risk basic options like melee, perfect block, etc. that can create opportunites for crazy strong and risky "resource-burning" special moves
Thanks for reading!
I feel the same in past experiences with games, with tab it isn't really thought of in combat and just an automatic element (imo akin to a passive being on that deals dmg). In action the most recent experience I had was new world with basic attacks being a lot of the combat at times or in variation depending on your class. Using the rapier with a heavy basic attack build that allowed me to attack faster than normal and what i had most my damage from felt extremely boring. The entirely of combat became mashing my left mouse button as fast as possible and any more of movement got in the way (almost as if standing still and the entirely of the game was just mashing left mouse button and that was the extend of combat for pve)
A lot of people brin up BDO has the best combat (my guild as well though that game has a lot of faults in combats). I have a different perspective when it comes to BDO and its combat and the way i look how it does basic attacks. I view it uniquely because for me any left mouse button + direction is a basic attack imo. Yet they have unique and have different functions per class and can be weak to core parts of your attacks, combos, and definitive abilities. Some have cooldowns, some do not have cool down and some attacks do have soft cooldowns.
I feel that element with BDO is good (one can argue it is skills but again for me i view it as basic attacks done in an advanced form). It adds some depth and chunkiness to the combat because it comes something you think about using to attack, to extend combos, to defend yourself and counter. It elevates combat from going to an extreme basic element where you are just spamming left mouse button as fast as possible and makes it more strategic.
There are some good lessons in the game in some of their approach's (though ruined by being more cat and mouse than a strategic fight and about spamming iframes and super armor).
With ashes of creation not having weapon skills (you can kind of say the same about BDO granted classes used unique weapons). I feel it is possible to have some element of that even if it isn't to the same level to have a bit more depth to the way players use basic attacks. Ie different types of basic attacks based on direction and having different effects applied, soft cooldowns unitized, different speeds and ranges of attacks based on direction.
Though naturally i feel people prefer skill rotations my guild included but for them its a bit more than just standing in one spot and cycling skills. It is about the push and pull you have with your skill, that feeling of momentum pushing a fight and winning, but also the feeling when you are pushed back and needs to be defensive.
Skills that have defensive qualities not just on stats but affecting player movement (ranger skill can be an example with the jump), offensive skills that let you push forward and you feel that strength and see it as players move back or try to get away. Those are elements that had push things to the next level imo, with speed and mobility scaled basic on the overall movement players are intended to have.
*edit
To add to my post I don't feel auto attacks should ever be a thing at any point in the game. Automatic types of combat in any form base attack or more, is better replaced by making any other system better. Doing damage for just existing leads to more of a static combat feel. Even more since this is a modern game and we are no longer in the 2003 era.
p.s never got used to mindless melee or ranged classes ability spamming in World of Warcraft.
- basic attacks are active attacks a player presses a button to execute
- auto attacks are attacks a character just does simply by targeting (and being in range) of a mob
For example, Witcher 3 had basic attacks as active combat attacks (fast attacks v. heavy attacks). WoW auto attacks as the baseline 'white' damage for active abilities.
Bottom line: I'd do both. I think basic attacks feel more important at low levels when a character has fewer abilities & special attacks. At higher levels, and end-game active basic attacks take a back seat to specialized attacks and auto-attacks seem more appropriate to fill in the gaps.
From a UX perspective, this could be something as simple as hard/lock targeting a mob also allows for auto-attacks. Soft targeting a mob (i.e. just targeting via reticle) requires an active basic attack. My favorite active combat system so far is Neverwinter Online, for ranged at least you could adapt to the above idea simply by toggling a ranged auto-attack with a target lock.
I agree with your angle. Basic attacks I think feel best as a "supplement" to your rotation if you have mismanaged resources or on an as needed basis and as a crutch at the low levels as you build up your rotation and skill acquisition. I personally am not a huge fan of auto attacking as I think having a robust set of skills leads to having your hands full typically with your rotation.
I fully agree spamming 1 button is a bad design. I like you Alice.
These guys chose hybrid-combat and appear to be caught in a tug of war between the two styles that combine to create hybrid combat. The problem is, they removed what makes each great, and gave neither the attention it deserves. Jack of all trades, master of none.
Basic attack mouse spam, thrown in there, just so they can say "hybrid-combat". If you're going to do it right, put some effort into it guys.
I will repeat what I said many many months ago. Combat is bland.
If they try to make clicking attacks worthwhile, they would need to do action combat justice.
Right now, it's not even WoW level combat and they throw in spamming basic attacks as opposed to auto attacks for basic attack damage to claim hybrid combat... which is just tedious, mind-numbingly pointless - not fun.
I mentioned Q spam years ago and they remedied the q spam in A1. Now they want to add Q spam back its not good. I've stated for years that the combat must be updated but it seems to be ignored. There are sparks of joy in some moments and then a crash to form in other moments. We need to wait and see a Phase 2 Tank, Phase 2 Ranger, Phase 2 Fighter etc. If the combat comes in phases its best we see all the phases at each juncture to provide feedback. I'm not sure if phase 2 will be seen in A2 or phase 3. I would hope phase 2 is in A2 so we can provide feedback before phase 3.
It would be great if the combat rotations and basic attacks do something different in pvp and pve. That way greater balance can be achieved. PvE and PvP can be balanced separately that way too. Each major ability should have a counter ability rather than a whole hard counter class. That way, you don't get pvp where hard counters decimate lines, follow by counter hard counters decimating lines, followed by hard counters decimating lines etc. Balance much more like Guild Wars 1.
Filler most of the time since I always play caster. I feel I like to spend most the time castinfg my spells but I feel basic attack should be useful for caster in certain moments like pvp or arena.
• What role do you feel basic attacks and auto-attacks should play in MMORPG combat?
It really depends on the class for me, I feel like some classes are more suitable to have basic attacks integraded in their rotations.
• Do you want your rotation to be mostly abilities, or do you want to have auto-attacks be important in your rotation?
So as I said as a caster I like to have always spells to cast at any moment. So thats the most important for me.
Mainly a filler role, a sort of damage base, a way to fill down time. At least in those that weren't action type.
In these they were more precursors of attacks or combos and were more interesting.
What role do you feel basic attacks and auto-attacks should play in MMORPG combat?
I think they should have more importance than just being fillers, or a base for autoattack. I think the player should have the choice to make them important to their gameplay or not, but that it should be possible to have satisfying gameplay and satisfactory character building around auto-attacks. I think that games in the Dark Souls genre and their success showed us how important and enjoyable it was for a player to feel that they had a choice in their actions and that their actions had real importance and real consequences. Choosing between doing a "basic" attack or a skill should be a real choice and not just an automation or filler. Not to the point that it becomes cumbersome of course.
Do you want your rotation to be mostly abilities, or do you want to have auto-attacks be important in your rotation?
Why not both ? Once again the player should have the choice to specialize in one or the other or a hybrid of the two if that is their choice. Perhaps the talent and skill trees should allow the player to choose to what extent they want to reinforce the importance of one or the other in their gameplay and that both are rewarding and interesting for them.
Somehow my opinion is that auto attack or basic attack should be treated with as much care and importance as all other active skills. Because after all it is one, and surely the most complex of all because it is universal.
what's this? you mentioned in another thread
is the basic range ability just a quick nock and loose? does it allow empower/charge? does range/effectiveness play a role in that function?
Basic attacks should have good animations, be fast paced in the end game and just be satisfactory overall. No need to each attack be something that we have control over or something weird like that, feels awful in the gameplay.
The good gameplay experience is when we have that + agency of our movement + at least 15-20 skills to use in a class. The skills should be what we focus more towards, the auto-attacks should just be satisfactory like the rogue auto-attacks on the preview melee attack video.
WOW, only classic till WotLK, has many flaws but in regards to skill quantity/concepts and the way combat works its an awesome example. Improve upon that, but make sure to be at least as good as that. WoW PvP its also great in the first expansions.
I remember EverQuest's melee combat having barely anything but auto-attacks. A few classes had access to activated attacks like kick, slam and bash. They were part of the series/rotations of buttons you would press during combat, which included your macro for sense heading.
Dark Age of Camelot also had auto-attacks, but you could assign a skill that would apply to your next swing (much like the Hunter melee in WoW, well, in Vanilla and Classic, no idea for retail). Better, you could queue more than one. I remember it being quite useful on my Friar as I would always input a skill requiring a parry trigger and another one in case I didn't parry. If parry then x, else y. You could do the same for block with a shield for other classes.
WoW had white damage and yellow damage...
Auto-attacks are a staple of the MMORPG genre, but I feel we could do without them. They were the sensible answer for social games in an internet era in which all players communications were expected to be typed on a keyboard. There were a way to simulate a big hammer being slower to swing than a dagger, that itself being a transposition of the D&D 2nd edition optional rule of weapon speed modifying your initiative roll. A nerdish way (and I say that as a nerd) to give it an air of realism, all the while ignoring other important factors of combat such as a weapon striking distance.
It ended-up looking stupid wrong. Your character is waiting in a guard position waiting for the weapon speed. It looks/feels like an old game would. That's one thing that impressed me at the time about Lineage II: the animation of auto-attacks didn't look dumb, you character looked a lot more involved, or aware, in the fight.
Basic attacks are much better, at least as far as what they look like and feel like. I'd take the basic attacks of any 3rd person open world single player game over the auto-attacks of mmo. Assassin's Creed, The Witcher, For Honor, ... The list could go on and on. Combat feel as if you are more involved, you don't direct your character: you control it.
This might be a personal thing, but a game should always be on your main monitor, not a thing you do on your secondary one while watching something else. If it's that trivial that it requires so little of my attention, I won't even bother with it. It's not a game: it's a filler competing with my Instagram feed. Not all games using auto-attacks are that "bad", but I always need to feel like I'm the one playing, not as if I was watching the game play itself.
No more auto-attacks. All hail the basic attacks era.