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

Wildstar Action Combat?

Recommended Posts

I was going to buy Amber and then I found out you couldn't strafe jump or rocketjump. I thought this was going to be a hardcore PVP game, but I guess you prefer to appeal to carebears. You might as well just make it tab target. This is sarcasm if you haven't realized it by now.

Edited by frozenshadow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was ready to spend 250$ on the Amber Pack and then I saw the red aoe zones and the telegraphs.

 

Why don't you just remove any mention of skill in all of your descriptions and make this a tab target game? Don't design a game and try to sell it to hardcore PvPers and dress up telegraphs as skill.

 

Can you jump over attacks or do melee swings just hit things that are above it just like in tab target? Unless the blade collides with me I don't to take damage. How can a game even be considered skill based when so many of the attacks seem to be whirlwinds and have huge hitboxes?

 

When I swing I want my opponent to react - punished for not anticipating my strike or seeing my gunshot. If each of my attacks has a huge red zone that screams, "Warning, danger, danger! Move out of the opponent's damaging ability!" then what is the point of calling it skill?

 

Collision detection and anti-healing systems are great but unless you move towards an actual skill-oriented combat system then I am not interested. It will just fall in line with all of the other games that claim to have hardcore PvP but in reality, it's just an easy numbers game where you can't fail to hit a target.

 

Aside from that, the world systems in terms of persistent characters and temporary ring-worlds looks great - but it needs the combat to back it up.

Great post!  To me it isn't just the systems the game will have that are important, it's the fact that the company picked them which will tell me a lot about their internal philosophy.  If they preach hardcore pvp they need to show they mean business.  If I see them adopting systems that don't actually take much skill then I know they aren't serious about pvp. 

 

It's very possible that they are trying to make some sort of pvp themepark solely designed for people who aren't that good at pvp but want to believe they are good at pvp.  That actually wouldn't be illogical because there are more wannabe pvp gods than actual pvp gods. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was going to buy Amber and then I found out you couldn't strafe jump or rocketjump. I thought this was going to be a hardcore PVP game, but I guess you prefer to appeal to carebears. You might as well just make it tab target. This is sarcasm if you haven't realized it by now.

Some of us are serious about our pvp, the wildstar type combat is a huge turn-off for us.  Not only because of the telegraphs themselves, but what it means about how the attacks work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was going to buy Amber and then I found out you couldn't strafe jump or rocketjump. I thought this was going to be a hardcore PVP game, but I guess you prefer to appeal to carebears. You might as well just make it tab target. This is sarcasm if you haven't realized it by now.

 

I understand where you are coming from and have a wider view than you do apparently. I'm not bashing carebears and such, I've played lore-based and PvE based content to.

 

I have to ask though, why would you bash PvPers talking about a pitched-as hardcore PvP game - trying to keep it just that? We are giving feedback on the systems that are early in development where they can be modified and changed rather than down the road where we are stuck with telegraphs and non-skill systems.

 

You like PvE games? Awesome I do too - but there are tons of them out. Sure they have PvP but it isn't the hardcore type of skill-based action we want.

 

There is Darkfall but Adventurine is a joke and it doesn't have the systems this game promises and the polish.

 

Maybe add a good point here or there rather than sarcasm that provides no feedback.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see why many are considering vanilla darkfall to be an intense combat system but wasn't a lot of that adrenaline stemming from the fact that if you died in that exchange you lost everything down to your underpants? Death penalty had to have played some factor there.

 

What if we movement-locked special abilities that required the most resources to dish out. An archer pulling their string back on a rampart, a two handed warrior needing to scream "it's vader time!" before he swings, etc. Maybe that wouldn't work. 

Edited by gray

"When the snows fall and the white winds blow, the lone wolf dies but the pack survives." - Ned

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was ready to spend 250$ on the Amber Pack and then I saw the red aoe zones and the telegraphs.

 

Why don't you just remove any mention of skill in all of your descriptions and make this a tab target game? Don't design a game and try to sell it to hardcore PvPers and dress up telegraphs as skill.

 

Can you jump over attacks or do melee swings just hit things that are above it just like in tab target? Unless the blade collides with me I don't to take damage. How can a game even be considered skill based when so many of the attacks seem to be whirlwinds and have huge hitboxes?

 

When I swing I want my opponent to react - punished for not anticipating my strike or seeing my gunshot. If each of my attacks has a huge red zone that screams, "Warning, danger, danger! Move out of the opponent's damaging ability!" then what is the point of calling it skill?

 

Collision detection and anti-healing systems are great but unless you move towards an actual skill-oriented combat system then I am not interested. It will just fall in line with all of the other games that claim to have hardcore PvP but in reality, it's just an easy numbers game where you can't fail to hit a target.

 

Aside from that, the world systems in terms of persistent characters and temporary ring-worlds looks great - but it needs the combat to back it up.

this is first dude in here that talks some sense..

Edited by copperfield

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tera had good combat , my only problem with it was that there was so many skills I'd just button mash a rotation. Skills should be used situationally and tactically not just the same rotation over and over.I'm all for having a bunch of skills, but there should be a limit on how many can be used. Or at least a limit on which situations would be best to use a certain set of skills. Unlike Tera I shouldn't feel like using all my skills in a certain order works every time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand where you are coming from and have a wider view than you do apparently. I'm not bashing carebears and such, I've played lore-based and PvE based content to.

 

I have to ask though, why would you bash PvPers talking about a pitched-as hardcore PvP game - trying to keep it just that? We are giving feedback on the systems that are early in development where they can be modified and changed rather than down the road where we are stuck with telegraphs and non-skill systems.

 

You like PvE games? Awesome I do too - but there are tons of them out. Sure they have PvP but it isn't the hardcore type of skill-based action we want.

 

There is Darkfall but Adventurine is a joke and it doesn't have the systems this game promises and the polish.

 

Maybe add a good point here or there rather than sarcasm that provides no feedback.

 

Your first problem is assuming what is or is not a hardcore PVP based on combat system. Is StarCraft 2 any less 'hardcore PVP' than Quake 3 because they have two completely different combat systems? Fighting games like Street Fighter are probably the hardest games to master of any game. So should we say that any game that isn't a fighting game isn't actually a hardcore PVP game?

Edited by frozenshadow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your first problem is assuming what is or is not a hardcore PVP based on combat system. Is StarCraft 2 any less 'hardcore PVP' than Quake 3 because they have two completely different combat systems? Fighting games like Street Fighter are probably the hardest games to master of any game. So should we say that any game that isn't a fighting game isn't actually a hardcore PVP game?

We have tons of data in the mmorpg genre to figure out what takes skill in mmorpg systems, we also can draw from other genres where it makes sense.  For example you might be able to draw from a game like smite because the combat can be translated to mmorpgs. 

 

One thing that holds true across all genres is that what defines the most skillful play is the ability to make fast and correct decisions while handling the mechanics in a fast and fluid manner.  The way these games create high skill ceilings is by making those 2 processes difficult enough to where only a few truly excel. 

 

So in mmorpgs again understanding that there are 2 components to a players gaming skill, their ability to think and their ability to execute, we can look for ways to make that challenging.  Action combat games very often have aiming involved, that's a good way to make things challenging.  Adding diverse pool of abilities and variables can make strategy challenging. 

 

Now everything must be done within reason for what is enjoyable to players.  The majority of mmorpg players have had some exposure to the modern systems, they will not be shellshocked by action combat because they've been getting conditioned to it through their progression through games like WoW into games like gw2 and eso and tera. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skill caps and skill ceilings tend to be red herrings in this discussion in my opinion. You need to be better than your opponents to win consistently, and this remains true for very simple games.

And if you want the best player to consistently win, even given a smaller sample size.. what you need is effective counterplay, where you gain significant advantages by responding to your opponents actions. While sidestepping skillshots is one way to respond, other forms of counterplay can be achieved in most combat systems.

 

Arguing that some systems inherently and necessarily are more difficult and skill rewarding than others seems like a mistake to me.

 

That said, I prefer a lot of aiming, cause it's fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without locking, it would theoretically be possible to circle strafe enemies. Do you think that's a good idea?

 

There's this concept called stamina, which can keep people from bunny hopping, running around swinging their sword constantly, and other completely rediculous behaviours.  It has nothing to do with targeting at all.  And running sideways should be speed limited to begin with (try running sideways in real life without turning your torso). 

 

All this unrealistic crap people are talking about is a product of poor game design and nothing but.  It isn't inevitable nor should it be acceptable.  This is why Mount and Blade has such a large following seven years on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This combat is slower than WoWs.  Here's the thing, crowfall is pulling a lot from the SB/wiz101 crowd.  Those players would have a very difficult time adjusting to a real action combat system.  Artcraft has chosen a system that kind of feels a little like action combat but is still easier for the fans from their old games.  Logically this makes sense.  The only problem is they are trying to build a pvp-focused game, which will be bad with a design like this because PvP games that don't have a good skill-ceiling do not attract a good amount of players. 

'ats funny boyo.  Many of us ol SBers played tha beloved Darkfall 'at keeps gettin brought up an' dominated tha server.  I'll be tha first ta admit combat in DF was awful.  Nothin more an' a jump fest an' no real strategy involved with tha fights.  Group fights mostly be a bunch of 1v1s in close proximity.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If so many of you want twitchy fps gameplay, how about going and playing a fps? You're in the wrong genre.

 

"wrong genre".

 

Some of us just want combat that requires skill to take part in. Not some telegraphed, and animation locked combat.

 

Also, it's funny that genres seem to be so black and white with you. If it isn't easy-mode tabtarget, it doesn't mean the only other option is FPS. Look at TERA, Mount and Blade: Warband, Global Agenda, and more. TERA has action combat, Warband has skillful directional combat, and Global Agenda, while requiring aim, also had melee, and AoE weapons, as well as traditional snipers, and so forth.

 

There are more than two types of combat, in-case you haven't noticed.


 EOWWuhQ.png 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, I'm gonna say that you guys are awesome.  This is exactly the kind of passion we here in the office have about the game and we love seeing it from you guys as well.

 

Now, I am working on the combat system and I can confirm that we are leaning toward a more Tera style combat where there will be a reticle for aiming so that you can better target things for ranged combat.  What you see in the videos so far is pre-alpha footage and we're still refining the style and flow of combat, so nothing is set in stone yet.  

 

What we want to end up with is more strategic combat where the battlefield commanders can control the flow of combat, the tanks can protect the "weaker" characters, and the more agile characters have more freedom of movement to get around and get things done.  Skill should matter, not mashing buttons in a sequence.

 

quoting for latecomers sake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"In deciding what we want combat to “look and feel like,” we are drawing a lot of our inspiration from other recent MMOs. We love the idea of action-combat – but we have to make sure the game doesn’t get too “twitchy” (i.e. require lightning fast reflexes or too much button-mashing).

 

This is very important. Too many interactions and too much required action makes long play sessions tiring. 

Wildstar combat was both too active and the telegraphs didn't feel much like the attacks. I think taking the movement from Wildstar and the combat from Terra might be a good call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's this concept called stamina, which can keep people from bunny hopping, running around swinging their sword constantly, and other completely rediculous behaviours.  It has nothing to do with targeting at all.  And running sideways should be speed limited to begin with (try running sideways in real life without turning your torso). 

 

All this unrealistic crap people are talking about is a product of poor game design and nothing but.  It isn't inevitable nor should it be acceptable.  This is why Mount and Blade has such a large following seven years on.

In addition to this movement speed is also a factor.  Which can be reduced by wearing heavier armor and weapons.

You could even have a combat mode like Monster Hunter, which you can actively go into and out of.  Going from being able to interact, run, use items etc, to combat where the weight of your weapon slows you down to a crawl if it's heavy enough.

 

Then it's really down to balancing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think running should get you killed, battle posture and defending yourself by blocking should take priority over running and dodging.

 

Back stepping needs to be throttled hard.


a52d4a0d-044f-44ff-8a10-ccc31bfa2d87.jpg          Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes... Than if they're upset, they'll be a mile away, and barefoot :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'ats funny boyo.  Many of us ol SBers played tha beloved Darkfall 'at keeps gettin brought up an' dominated tha server.  I'll be tha first ta admit combat in DF was awful.  Nothin more an' a jump fest an' no real strategy involved with tha fights.  Group fights mostly be a bunch of 1v1s in close proximity.  

Well darkfall doesn't have a particularly high skill ceiling either, but from what i've heard from darkfallers, sb players didn't really dominate anything, so all I have is hearsay til there is proof. 

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...