Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Frykka

Anti-blob mechanic vs anti-zerg mechanic.

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Lately I have wondered if an anti blob mechanic is needed more than anti zerg.   Stronger aoe and more of it could cause more issues, FF in a dregs hardcore ruleset could help...    but maybe we should try a series of friendly proximity debuffs.

Tier 1 - 20 friendly players within 15m activates a -10% final damage modifier debuff on a player.

Tier 2 - 30 friendly players within 25m activates a -20% final damage modifier debug on a player.

Tier 3 - 40 friendly players within 35m activates a-30% final damage modifier debug on a player..

Zerg or rather blob all you want but an advantage goes to spread out players.

I am sure that there are other issues to arise but blob v blob play has little appeal yet it is difficult to spread the blob.

Works on a similar  checksum as the overwhelming odds passive but in reverse.

 

Edited by Frykka

6FUI4Mk.jpg

                                                        Sugoi - Senpai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Staff said:

aoe proximity buffs

The Hammer of Todd- deals 100-200 +40% weapon damage in a 5m radius, can be upgraded to 200-300+200% weapon damage in a 5m radius if surrounded by 10+ enemies 

I think going the opposite way would be more effective.   If everyone in a blob loses damage then ttk goes up or they get to a point where no kills happen while the smaller blob can get attrition on the larger.    Combined with solid aoe powers the lose formation can surround and pummel the tight blob.


6FUI4Mk.jpg

                                                        Sugoi - Senpai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Frykka said:

I think going the opposite way would be more effective.   If everyone in a blob loses damage then ttk goes up or they get to a point where no kills happen while the smaller blob can get attrition on the larger.    Combined with solid aoe powers the lose formation can surround and pummel the tight blob.

You could just use politics instead of asking for dev intervention. 


40 minutes ago, Andius said:

W/HoA were held up as like these mystical forces of highly skilled players with legendary theorycrafters chained to a desk in some deep dungeon holding all the arcane secrets we could use to win if only we knew them.

wiDfyPp.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Politics?    Don't get you there Mandy...   how would you politic players to spread out?    Ask nicely?   Lul...

Blob v blob goes back to SB stacks...  collision doesn't do the job so we have blobs rather than stacks.    Are you saying you personally like blob v blob over more spread out battle lines?     Can we get better and more dynamic fights when we have large numbers in a parcel?    


6FUI4Mk.jpg

                                                        Sugoi - Senpai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Need a skill that would pushing people for blobing without rewarding people for blobing while doing it. 

Maybe an aoe that does more dmg the more people it hits but at the same time doing less dmg when it has allies in it. 

So like 20% more dmg for each unique person it hits while losing 20% for each ally within 10m-20m? So if its 30 vs 10 it would do 600%-200%=400% dmg

Could also make eso type siege things that do massive siege dmg. This might make pitched battles revolved around artillery.

Edited by Marth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Frykka said:

Politics?    Don't get you there Mandy...   how would you politic players to spread out?    Ask nicely?   Lul...

Blob v blob goes back to SB stacks...  collision doesn't do the job so we have blobs rather than stacks.    Are you saying you personally like blob v blob over more spread out battle lines?     Can we get better and more dynamic fights when we have large numbers in a parcel?    

Could maybe add a "crowded" debuf.

Not sure the range or numbers to use but a similar effect to slowed or forced into "walking" stance, and added power cooldown like that added when using a heavy weapon. Maybe a stamina burn as well, or a stop of stamina regen so CC has more impact (Lack of E regen)

Basically the kind of thing that should normally happen when beings are too crowded. 

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

Could maybe add a "crowded" debuf.

Not sure the range or numbers to use but a similar effect to slowed or forced into "walking" stance, and added power cooldown like that added when using a heavy weapon. Maybe a stamina burn as well, or a stop of stamina regen so CC has more impact (Lack of E regen)

Basically the kind of thing that should normally happen when beings are too crowded. 

making overwhelming odds and resolution scale up and down with group size. More allies lower the gain of the minor. More enemies increase the gain from the minors. 

maybe something like

if its 10 v 20 you might get 15+ mit and 50% dmg

and if its 20v10 you dont get anything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Medicaid said:

that dont make sense so to defend a tree during seige (attackers or defenders)....a faction would need to nerf themself by being FORCED to blob up at a tree?

Actually we are blobbing at the tree anyway with no penalty...   you could still strategically protect the tree room by spreading to all sides a bit, the room is bigger than 15m.   30m maybe end to end so 2 groups of 20 on each end doesn't trigger the debuffs on anyone unless the get too close..

Same goes for attackers rushing the tree in a blob instead of approaching from multiple sides.

 

Edited by Frykka

6FUI4Mk.jpg

                                                        Sugoi - Senpai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Frykka said:

Actually we are blobbing at the tree anyway with no penalty...   you could still strategically protect the tree room by spreading to all sides a bit, the room is bigger than 15m.   30m maybe end to end so 2 groups of 20 on each end doesn't trigger the debuffs on anyone unless the get too close..

Same goes for attackers rushing the tree in a blob instead of approaching from multiple sides.

 

This of course assumes the best conquest mechanic is a single tree, as opposed to something more spread out and objective based.

An example of a mechanic that would split the blob would be four smaller trees at each corner of the keep, with a similar "shield" to the motherloads, that "spiritually" tied together, so that in order to damage one tree, you must be hitting all the other trees at the same time.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is all a symptom of small guilds disliking the fact that they are out numbered.  The numbers we see now are small.  If this game is going to make it it’s going to need to be able to field lots of people at major fights.  


40 minutes ago, Andius said:

W/HoA were held up as like these mystical forces of highly skilled players with legendary theorycrafters chained to a desk in some deep dungeon holding all the arcane secrets we could use to win if only we knew them.

wiDfyPp.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one has really said where they have a problem with players balling up. I'm going to assume that open field 50v50s are ok? If so, then as I see it, there are 3 things leading to players balling up.

Part of the problem is too few objectives. The entire player base is condensed into attacking/defending 3 objectives. If we had 6 or even 12 keeps for the current player base, no one team would be able to commit 60 players to a single attack without leaving themselves wide open somewhere; unless they're the loosing team, then it's a catch up mechanic.

Another problem, as KrakkenSmacken pointed out, is having only one objective within the keep; eventually everyone will end up at that one point. The idea of linking multiple Trees of Life together is a good start, but it leaves open the possibility that the defenders will only defend one tree. For this to work, there can't be a way for either the attacker or the defender to focus on any single point. If the attackers had to be attacking 3 of 4 trees to drop the shield then the defenders would be forced to defend 2, giving a 2/3 defensive advantage. Paired with an increase in the number of objectives from above, and this isn't necessarily a bad thing.

The last problem I see is body blocking: stacking as many large tanks into a space as you can to prevent the enemy from passing through that space. AOE's and the lack of 'fire hose healing'(/sarc) would normally make that manageable, but for now tank, shields & healing are the meta. I'd hate to see having more physics (force mage & tornadoes) be the answer, but until we have a ranged solution, this is the meta. Maybe allowing Brigands to throw their bombs rather than dropping them would be a start?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, VaMei said:

No one has really said where they have a problem with players balling up. I'm going to assume that open field 50v50s are ok? If so, then as I see it, there are 3 things leading to players balling up.

Part of the problem is too few objectives. The entire player base is condensed into attacking/defending 3 objectives. If we had 6 or even 12 keeps for the current player base, no one team would be able to commit 60 players to a single attack without leaving themselves wide open somewhere; unless they're the loosing team, then it's a catch up mechanic.

Another problem, as KrakkenSmacken pointed out, is having only one objective within the keep; eventually everyone will end up at that one point. The idea of linking multiple Trees of Life together is a good start, but it leaves open the possibility that the defenders will only defend one tree. For this to work, there can't be a way for either the attacker or the defender to focus on any single point. If the attackers had to be attacking 3 of 4 trees to drop the shield then the defenders would be forced to defend 2, giving a 2/3 defensive advantage. Paired with an increase in the number of objectives from above, and this isn't necessarily a bad thing.

The last problem I see is body blocking: stacking as many large tanks into a space as you can to prevent the enemy from passing through that space. AOE's and the lack of 'fire hose healing'(/sarc) would normally make that manageable, but for now tank, shields & healing are the meta. I'd hate to see having more physics (force mage & tornadoes) be the answer, but until we have a ranged solution, this is the meta. Maybe allowing Brigands to throw their bombs rather than dropping them would be a start?

 

The blob meta isn't going to go away just because you add more objectives to sieges.  It's indicative of the fact that there are more melee than ranged and more functioning melee classes than ranged classes.

Lets break down the melee vs ranged:

Assassin: 3 melee

Champion: 3 melee

Cleric: 3 ranged

Confessor: 1 is a melee range shotgun and the other 2 are ranged

Druid: 3 ranged

Duelist: 2 melee and 1 short range ranged

Knight: 3 melee

Myrmidon: 3 melee

Ranger: 2 melee and 1 ranged

Templar: 3 melee

So 20 melee and 10 ranged ( a few of which are short range) of the available 30 classes.  That's twice as many melee as their are ranged.  It doesn't matter what funky siege mechanics people dream up, the game is going to be a melee ball because there are twice as many melee classes as there are ranged.  When they add Frostweaver even if all three specs are ranged the ratio isn't even.  They will need to add 7 specs (after FW) for it to be melee to range even on class ratio.

Most of the melee specs work.  Some need a balance pass over (CC myrm, CC Templar, CC knight, there's a pattern...) but they for the most part function relatively well.  The range classes are mostly countered by one disc (elementalist) and some of them have huge class issues (radicals mana issue, 1h hammers skill tree not boosting the damage type the class who uses it uses, arbiter being a weird hybrid and archer not benefiting from quivers correctly). 

 

tldr: theres more melee classes that half work than than there are range classes that do or don't work combined, melee ball seems to be designed into CF

 

Edited by mandalore

40 minutes ago, Andius said:

W/HoA were held up as like these mystical forces of highly skilled players with legendary theorycrafters chained to a desk in some deep dungeon holding all the arcane secrets we could use to win if only we knew them.

wiDfyPp.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mandalore said:

tldr: theres more melee classes that half work than than there are range classes that do or don't work combined, melee ball seems to be designed into CF

/thread

Playing with objectives can make the balls smaller, but when combat range is 6m for most classes, that's how far apart they're going to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, Frykka said:

Stronger aoe

is what's needed. 

Remove AoE caps and blobs will spread out or die. 

Then there's sufficient counter play to the heal circle/divine light/runecaster/etc./etc. fight in a blob circle meta when you can blow them up with AoE. 

There's a couple tweaks that might be needed...like uncapped AoE neckbreakers would be an issue lol. Dmg needs to be toned down on that one. Otherwise most AoE powers aren't strong until they're stacked which requires an enemy force to blob up and a friendly force to coordinate AoEs and take advantage of it. 

Edited by blazzen
neckbreaker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, blazzen said:

is what's needed. 

Remove AoE caps and blobs will spread out or die. 

Then there's sufficient counter play to the heal circle/divine light/runecaster/etc./etc. fight in a blob circle meta when you can blow them up with AoE. 

There's a couple tweaks that might be needed...like uncapped AoE neckbreakers would be an issue lol. Dmg needs to be toned down on that one. Otherwise most AoE powers aren't strong until they're stacked which requires an enemy force to blob up and a friendly force to coordinate AoEs and take advantage of it. 

How will blobs die when most the classes are still melee?


40 minutes ago, Andius said:

W/HoA were held up as like these mystical forces of highly skilled players with legendary theorycrafters chained to a desk in some deep dungeon holding all the arcane secrets we could use to win if only we knew them.

wiDfyPp.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, blazzen said:

Between the 5.9 armor changes and a change in the AoE cap you should see more ranged. 

Oh, and wtb frostweaver. 

There are twice as many melee as there are ranged.  Mechanics aren't going to change that.  Adding 3 ranged (if all of FW is ranged) will bring it 20/13, still a lot more melee than range.  Nothing clever, aoe caps being removed, siege mechanics being changed, none of that is going to change that there a custard ton more melee classes than ranged.  The melee ball seems intentional. 

Edited by mandalore

40 minutes ago, Andius said:

W/HoA were held up as like these mystical forces of highly skilled players with legendary theorycrafters chained to a desk in some deep dungeon holding all the arcane secrets we could use to win if only we knew them.

wiDfyPp.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mandalore said:

There are twice as many melee as there are ranged.  Mechanics aren't going to change that.  Adding 3 ranged (if all of FW is ranged) will bring it 20/13, still a lot more melee than range.  Nothing clever, aoe caps being removed, siege mechanics being changed, none of that is going to change that there a custard ton more melee classes than ranged.  The melee ball seems intentional.

The number of each type of class doesn't necessarily mean it'll be an equal split for what people actually play.

Take healers for example. 

3/30 promotions = 10%. 

Actual healer % is probably closer to 30-40%. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...