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

oh god pls no

Recommended Posts

Thank you, I know I do cuz I'm a reader and a thinker. People want combat to be as slow as possible. So let's give em that. Turn based, nothing outside of thinking and rng matters, it's perfect.

Is crowfall the hearthstone killer?


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I suck so bad at aiming let me miss. People need a good laugh at times with a hardcore game such as Crowfall.

 

Now if I am landing each shot by ranged then let me feel like a god!

 

The point is if ranged is very difficult to land then make them feel rewarded when they land their shots. Give ranged combat a bursty combat feel while give melee a more sustained combat feel ie bleeds, lower cds, and maybe have an execution ability for them plus additional armor.

 

IF they go the route of making a sticky target system however give them like a 60% hit chance and 25% lower damage..... they would really need to balance those numbers though so people that are decent with manual aiming should beat those using sticky target. Reward those with skill, however make it so these old players and those with bad ping be able to contribute still in fights.

Edited by Vitalized

PvE is like water to my whiskey. Don't water down my whiskey.- Ronald Reagan

 

Don't be a custard gonzo.- Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow, i really hope 90% of the super elitist ultra pvp must be done leave crowfall forums and the game as well with their statements of it must be one way or the highway.  I want somewhere between daoc and shadowbane combat and i want to matter on the field of battle and ride the edge of an Adrenalin high each time i do battle.  there made my statement.  twitch combat, bunnyhopping, buffbots, multiaccount playstyle can gtfo and i will be happy cause those are the reasons why i quit games.

 

cant wait to see all the deaths from friendly fire though at this rate with projectiles traveling and not caring if friend or foe...same should be for  melee and there WILL be no zergballs at all because the moment one did an aoe would damage/kill everyone around him...lol

 

sigh.  cant wait til actual combat is done in game and tweaked a bit to see what really will happen and if its fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are creating your own personal definition of what soft lock is oposed to aim assist. Soft lock in itself is a form of aim assist and have been used in many fps games. This of course especially applies to console games. My point is just that soft lock is a rather broad term. So is aim assist. 

 

ESO and Tera differ wildly. I agree. However I think that the idea that the aim assist used in the games is what make them different kind of narrow minded. The games are quite fundamentally different where one is very close to traditional tab target with some illusionary mechanics the other is closer to the oposite end of the spectrum.

 

Lets get back to the idea of soft lock and how it is often used as a form of aim assist in console shooters. So imagine you are playing an FPS and then imagine a circle or a square around your reticule. The idea is that the size of said circle or square determines the range of your soft lock. Some games choose to make this appearant to you, by actually moving the reticule over the target. However most games chose to hide that mechanic and only let you hit your target. The idea behind a soft lock is actually pretty much a bigger reticule with auto aim.

 

Now to repeat. That would effectively be identical to having a bigger hit box and a bigger effective reticule. Yes the ratio between hit box and reticule differs, but the only thing both basically do is make your reticule bigger and more effective.

 

Now just to reiterate. Soft lock can come in many shapes and sizes. There is no catch all example for the use of soft lock or aim assistance. My point was merely that.

In console FPS that's pure aim assist.  In the context of an MMORPG's combat system Soft Lock is basically tab target without having to tab.  ESo is the perfect example.  You aim into the enemy and just attack.  So long as you're aimed into them enough the game considers them locked.  It just takes the tab out of tab target allowing you more fluid control over it (but it has its own mess of problems).  Tera shows us a good example of aim assist.  So long as your reticule is over the enemy when the skill goes off, it works, and the reticule is larger on purpose to assist aiming.  But, some skills, like the Lancer leash, does not get the aim assist and requires precision aiming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In console FPS that's pure aim assist.  In the context of an MMORPG's combat system Soft Lock is basically tab target without having to tab.  ESo is the perfect example.  You aim into the enemy and just attack.  So long as you're aimed into them enough the game considers them locked.  It just takes the tab out of tab target allowing you more fluid control over it (but it has its own mess of problems).  Tera shows us a good example of aim assist.  So long as your reticule is over the enemy when the skill goes off, it works, and the reticule is larger on purpose to assist aiming.  But, some skills, like the Lancer leash, does not get the aim assist and requires precision aiming.

I think Tera is a good base and if they made a slightly more manual aimed version of Tera's combat we would be in a good place. I'm expecting ESO combat though, only reason I haven't backed more than $5.


gCWxS8u.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Tera is a good base and if they made a slightly more manual aimed version of Tera's combat we would be in a good place. I'm expecting ESO combat though, only reason I haven't backed more than $5.

Im mainly worried that in pre alpha and stuff they'll get a lot of not-so-good players who complain to make the combat really really newbish. 


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im mainly worried that in pre alpha and stuff they'll get a lot of not-so-good players who complain to make the combat really really newbish. 

That is my fear as well to be honest.

 

Here is to hoping they can stick with a vision, and that some quality folks put down some quality money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think it's more about having a realistic view on latency and system performances overall than quality of testers.

 

Combat for me needs to be fun, engaging and challenging, how that is achieved, I do not care. I would prefer manual aiming above every other option. But if this can't be done in a fair and proper way for everybody involved and ACE has to step away from this, then so be it.

 

Imagine how much fun it is for you or how great your skills are when you always pwn your opponent because you have a better system or connection. Yeah, no.

 

The game has more to offer than combat alone. While I agree combat is a very important part of any mmorpg, it's certainly not the only reason I play. If combat is your sole reason to back a game, well, there are other genres that might be better suited to you.

 

Edit:

 

PS. ACE promised us action combat and there are many variants of this.

Edited by Canth

ZCcquVD.png

THE most active European Crowfall community. Join us now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In console FPS that's pure aim assist.  In the context of an MMORPG's combat system Soft Lock is basically tab target without having to tab.  ESo is the perfect example.  You aim into the enemy and just attack.  So long as you're aimed into them enough the game considers them locked.  It just takes the tab out of tab target allowing you more fluid control over it (but it has its own mess of problems).  Tera shows us a good example of aim assist.  So long as your reticule is over the enemy when the skill goes off, it works, and the reticule is larger on purpose to assist aiming.  But, some skills, like the Lancer leash, does not get the aim assist and requires precision aiming.

 

Thats a pretty big assumption, and it does not consider quite a few core elements of what we do know of Crowfalls combat system at this point.

 

Like you said ESO is basically "tab target" with the exception that you use your reticule to choose the target. However, saying thats the way soft lock works in mmorpgs is quite a narrow view, with very little basis in reality. I mean one example does not make a rule. Anyways I wouldn't even really consider ESO soft lock, but rather full lock. That is however my own personal opinion.

 

ACE has already established quite a few elements that would make it very unlikely that their definition of "soft lock" equals ESOs "full lock" with reticule target choosing. For one, we know they are taking inspiration from Tera. From the examples of the skills they have come with this far it is also becoming clear, as expected out of a action oriented combat system, that they are focusing a lot on mobility. Furthermore animation locking has also been discussed at length.

 

Another one of the more telling elements is of course the physics system. All of these are elements that make the assumption that "soft lock" means tab targeting very unlikely. Because it would basically undermine a lot of the ideas in the already established ideas and systems.

 

My point from the start, which I still stand by, is that Soft lock can be defined in a lot of ways. And Tera, which is the example most people used, basically have soft lock if you look at the mechanics they used to assist in aiming in that game.

Edited by RabbitFly

mael4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think it's more about having a realistic view on latency and system performances overall than quality of testers.

 

Combat for me needs to be fun, engaging and challenging, how that is achieved, I do not care. I would prefer manual aiming above every other option. But if this can't be done in a fair and proper way for everybody involved and ACE has to step away from this, then so be it.

 

Imagine how much fun it is for you or how great your skills are when you always pwn your opponent because you have a better system or connection. Yeah, no.

 

The game has more to offer than combat alone. While I agree combat is a very important part of any mmorpg, it's certainly not the only reason I play. If combat is your sole reason to back a game, well, there are other genres that might be better suited to you.

 

Edit:

 

PS. ACE promised us action combat and there are many variants of this.

Awesome post.....It will draw flames from the face rolling key board warriors though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think it's more about having a realistic view on latency and system performances overall than quality of testers.

 

I think the realistic view is that people with over 100ping should not expect a perfect gaming experience and people with mediocre computers should not either.  GW even went so far as to say they are trying to appeal hardware-wise to the hardcore people with good computers. 

 

Anyway having decent internet and a good computer is not hard in this day and age, though there are exceptions, so that shouldn't even be an issue for most... a bad quality of testers can work to ruin a game at its roots. 

 

Combat for me needs to be fun, engaging and challenging, how that is achieved, I do not care. I would prefer manual aiming above every other option. But if this can't be done in a fair and proper way for everybody involved and ACE has to step away from this, then so be it.

 

There is no "fair", some people just aren't good at things that take more skill than other things. 

 

Imagine how much fun it is for you or how great your skills are when you always pwn your opponent because you have a better system or connection. Yeah, no.

 

Just because someone has a better system or connection doesn't mean anything, a sound player isn't going to lose to a weaker player because of such things... those kinda excuses only pop up when a bad player is losing. 

 

The game has more to offer than combat alone. While I agree combat is a very important part of any mmorpg, it's certainly not the only reason I play. If combat is your sole reason to back a game, well, there are other genres that might be better suited to you.

 

Edit:

 

PS. ACE promised us action combat and there are many variants of this.


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's been a lot of talk about 'bad quality testers' providing less than helpful feedback on the combat system.

 

I would be worried less about the 'bad quality testers' and more worried about Gordon and J. Todd taking their words for it early.  I mean seriously, the pre-alpha group is under 1000 people I believe.  Would you really expect a knee-jerk change based on a tiny subset of a small subset to begin with?  I wouldn't.

 

I'm not afraid of 'bad quality testers'.  I'm not afraid of Gordon and J. Todd jumping to appease an initial group.  I expect them to look at it with an objective eye and maybe (big maybe) consider modifying the system 6+ months down the road if the trend shows a significant portion of the testers think it needs a tweek.

 

In that case, the hardcore, twitch-based crowd would prove to be a minority and would either accept it and stay or move on.  They've said it numerous times: they're not making a game for everyone.

 

Same token, if the complainers about the ranged targeting system are a minority and it doesn't change, then they are the ones with a decision to make.  Stay and work with it or move on.

 

Bottom line: We haven't even experienced the current incarnation of the system.  We'll have to wait, try it and then give our feedback.


http://www.twitch.tv/Waikikamukau Yes, it's Why-Kick-Uh-Moo-Cow / Twitter: @TheMukau

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There's been a lot of talk about 'bad quality testers' providing less than helpful feedback on the combat system.
 
I would be worried less about the 'bad quality testers' and more worried about Gordon and J. Todd taking their words for it early.  I mean seriously, the pre-alpha group is under 1000 people I believe.  Would you really expect a knee-jerk change based on a tiny subset of a small subset to begin with?  I wouldn't.
 
I'm not afraid of 'bad quality testers'.  I'm not afraid of Gordon and J. Todd jumping to appease an initial group.  I expect them to look at it with an objective eye and maybe (big maybe) consider modifying the system 6+ months down the road if the trend shows a significant portion of the testers think it needs a tweek.
 
In that case, the hardcore, twitch-based crowd would prove to be a minority and would either accept it and stay or move on.  They've said it numerous times: they're not making a game for everyone.
 
Same token, if the complainers about the ranged targeting system are a minority and it doesn't change, then they are the ones with a decision to make.  Stay and work with it or move on.
 
Bottom line: We haven't even experienced the current incarnation of the system.  We'll have to wait, try it and then give our feedback.

 

Oh... I am worried about it because i've seen it push games into bad directions...

 

Edit:  Most gamers do not know what makes for good games... they enjoy playing them but they don't know what it takes to make them enjoyable.  When it comes to the difficulty of a game, a tester is generally likely to suggest things that make him more effective more quickly, instead of things that would be challenging and that he would have to work to get good at.  It's gaming nature for people to suggest the path of least personal resistance for themselves.

 

So let's say some tester goes in... and he is absolutely awful at the game initially, he will likely suggest the game be made easier instead of thinking about whether it's an overall better experience if he is made to work towards getting better over time. 

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh... I am worried about it because i've seen it push games into bad directions...

 

Edit:  Most gamers do not know what makes for good games... they enjoy playing them but they don't know what it takes to make them enjoyable.  When it comes to the difficulty of a game, a tester is generally likely to suggest things that make him more effective more quickly, instead of things that would be challenging and that he would have to work to get good at.  It's gaming nature for people to suggest the path of least personal resistance for themselves.

 

So let's say some tester goes in... and he is absolutely awful at the game initially, he will likely suggest the game be made easier instead of thinking about whether it's an overall better experience if he is made to work towards getting better over time. 

 

I disagree.  You are equating gamer/player with tester.  They are not the same.  While it is possible to be a gamer/player and a tester, it is difficult for most to draw a line.  

 

Tester in alpha/beta - documents bugs, reports bugs, pushes an unfinished system in the hopes of uncovering loopholes and exploits for the developers to correct so they don't become glaring issues once it goes gold.

 

Player in alpha/beta - minimal documentation/reports sent to the devs as issues are found, uses the time spent during testing to become intimately familiar with the game and maps a route to take on release to maximize their advantage once it goes gold. 

 

Bad Player in alpha/beta - finds loopholes, exploits and other anomalies and does what they can to mask them from the dev team in the hopes they will make it into release giving themselves a massive advantage once it goes gold.

 

A player or a bad player would do what they could to make the game easier/give themselves an advantage.  A tester knows enough to put the future of the game over their own self-interest.

 

That's just my opinion.  I hear where you are coming from, I want to see Crowfall succeed.  I would rather we have more tester types and less bad player types in alpha/beta but money talks and we'll see what we end up with as time goes on.


http://www.twitch.tv/Waikikamukau Yes, it's Why-Kick-Uh-Moo-Cow / Twitter: @TheMukau

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as players playing on the wrong servers and are too lazy/incapable of aiming evenly remotely well can land 95%+ of their shots I think we'll be good. GW2 would be a great combat style to mimic, what a great game.


gCWxS8u.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im mainly worried that in pre alpha and stuff they'll get a lot of not-so-good players who complain to make the combat really really newbish. 

I'm mainly worried the Crowfall devs will listen to the very vocal people who incessantly demand a twitchy game.

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...