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

What Combat System Do You Prefer?

Combat System  

966 members have voted

  1. 1. What combat system do you want?

    • Tab Targetting
      196
    • Action Based (with hotbars)
      257
    • Action Based (withOUT hotbars)
      52
    • Action Based (Random Deck System)
      25
    • Action Based with Active Blocking
      372
    • Something totally different (Please post your reason below)
      67


Recommended Posts

Would strongly agree that realism makes the game more interesting than the whee look at me im using a cyclone ability type of game. Another thing to not do is have some great prevalence of 'gap closers' which pretty much make position worthless, since everyone is warping to the other players to instantly attack and removes any semblance of a 'front' to a battle.

 

I definitely agree with you on the point of gap closers. I think they ruin the overall feel of combat, and make footwork, and positioning not even matter.


 EOWWuhQ.png 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tab targetin + action based.

simple, but also someway rewarding for player skill.

I dont think here fits a combat simulation like Kingdom come. I have played War of the Roses and watched that game die terribly.

 

For no lagging combat needs to be simple and not a physics simulation.

I would add some action based parry but in a simple manner. say warrior can add a percentile to their defense if they are actively blocking in the adecuate direction.

just that. Also an active way of blocking for mages or spell casters, like a counter attackmissle or magic shield (although im not very fond to magic. currently im writing my own dark fantasy setting for a tabletop rpg with no mages :P).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would strongly agree that realism makes the game more interesting than the whee look at me im using a cyclone ability type of game. Another thing to not do is have some great prevalence of 'gap closers' which pretty much make position worthless, since everyone is warping to the other players to instantly attack and removes any semblance of a 'front' to a battle.

 

Yeah, that's a bunch of cartoony bull****. I'm for having a "sprint button" which increases speed/momentum at the cost of stamina, but not the kind of gap closers we see in every other MMO. Further, removing those gap closers allows ranged weapons to be effective without turning them into cartoony legolas arrow machine guns.


Shadowbane - House Avari/Hy'shen
"Gimp elves get good elves killed." - Belina

Avari Discord - https://discord.gg/Bch24PV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand how one can say aimed combat with active blocking is a spamfest, or that it is more boring than tab target.

 

The only players who spam their attacks are bad players, who are bad at blocking. Any good player would keep blocking, and wait for an opportunity to strike, or use footwork to step out of range, and then go in for a strike, once the opponent has gotten to close. The only thing that must be done in a tab-target game, is making sure you're facing an enemy, and in range of your skill. How exactly is that skillful, or more engaging than active blocking aimed combat?


 EOWWuhQ.png 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I highly doubt you have played either game, because if you had, you would have known that the companies, and funding are the reason the games are not doing well. Both companies started with VERY little funding, and obtained investments later on. Secondly, Aventurine, the company behind Darkfall, has had bad PR, and are not well liked by anyone. It has nothing to do with the combat, so please do some research, instead of trying to make up "facts".

 

You are wrong, I played both.

 

In fact, my entire guild was eagerly awaiting Darkfall.  Not sure if you are aware, but the game went through a very long development stage.  Lots of promises made, no results until long after.  Still, the game could have been great if it included a modicum of strategy or intelligence required for combat.  Instead it's just a garbage FPS clone trying to pretend to be an MMO RPG.

 

And you also make no sense.  Where do you think companies get money from?  Subscribers & game sales. If the game style was appealing to more than a tiny niche of fanbois, the games would actually have enough players to sustain.  Subscribes dropped like flies and the cash flow dried up, simple as that.

 

It's not the companies fault, except as far as they designed a game with a crappy combat system that nobody wants to pay to play.

 

If Crowfall goes the same route, I expect the same results.  You and your buddies who want an action game will wonder puzzled why Crowfall is failing, and blame it on lack of funding.  Oddly enough that is what happens when a game developer uses systems that alienate the older gaming population (incidentally, the gaming population that has the most money to blow on such games).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are wrong, I played both.

 

In fact, my entire guild was eagerly awaiting Darkfall.  Not sure if you are aware, but the game went through a very long development stage.  Lots of promises made, no results until long after.  Still, the game could have been great if it included a modicum of strategy or intelligence required for combat.  Instead it's just a garbage FPS clone trying to pretend to be an MMO RPG.

 

And you also make no sense.  Where do you think companies get money from?  Subscribers & game sales. If the game style was appealing to more than a tiny niche of fanbois, the games would actually have enough players to sustain.  Subscribes dropped like flies and the cash flow dried up, simple as that.

 

It's not the companies fault, except as far as they designed a game with a crappy combat system that nobody wants to pay to play.

 

If Crowfall goes the same route, I expect the same results.  You and your buddies who want an action game will wonder puzzled why Crowfall is failing, and blame it on lack of funding.  Oddly enough that is what happens when a game developer uses systems that alienate the older gaming population (incidentally, the gaming population that has the most money to blow on such games).

 

I never said Darkfall was a prime example of how combat should be done, so I am unsure as to why you have a fixation about Darkfall, and discussing it with me. I only referred to Mount and Blades combat.

 

Secondly, I obviously realize that companies gain money through subscribers, and initial game purchases, but it is silly to think that investments do not help. Investments can be huge amount of money, and essential to a company.

 

Lastly, Darkfall was a niche game with full loot, that is why it never got amazingly popular. Full loot games, with hardcore PvP are a niche, and many players don't want to take the time to get good at a game, they just want ezmode games, which require no thought to play. The crowfall devs have already stated that this game isn't for everyone, so I am hoping by that they mean the game is very hardcore, and has some sort of non-tab target full loot system going on.

 

It doesn't matter if this game has a small population, as long as it is fun. As I said, the devs have stated they don;t need everyone. Maybe they don't need me, and my aimed hardcore PvP combat, or maybe they don't need others and their tab target combat.

 

I'm not saying anyone shouldn't be able to enjoy what they like, but saying tab target requires more skill, is just a bit silly.


 EOWWuhQ.png 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Tab target" requires more strategic skill.

 

Lets take things to the extreme.  On one hand you have quake, on the other hand you have tic tac toe.

 

You can  play quake with zero thought or strategy at all, and still win, just because by jumping around dodging enough that it's hard to get hit and with one lucky rocket burst you can get a kill.

 

However, if you play tic tac toe with no thought or strategy, just picking random spots to play in, the vasty majority of the time you will lose if you are playing against a regular person using strategy.

 

Those who enjoy the strategic aspect feel that the game results should be determined by strategy. If I use the correct moves to counter your character, I should win.  When you add FPS elements to the game, all that goes out the window. I could be playing the perfect game, strategically, but because you jumped around and made my attack miss you win anyway.  

 

Your combat system makes strategy meaningless, and removes that entire element of skill. Instead it's replaced with some sort of a twitch reactions/FPS aiming "skill", one that really has nothing to do with the RPG genre normally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Tab target" requires more strategic skill.

 

Lets take things to the extreme.  On one hand you have quake, on the other hand you have tic tac toe.

 

You can  play quake with zero thought or strategy at all, and still win, just because by jumping around dodging enough that it's hard to hit him and with one lucky rocket burst he can kill you.

 

However, if you play tic tac toe with no thought or strategy, just picking random spots to play in, the vasty majority of the time you will lose.

 

Those who enjoy the strategic aspect feel that the game results should be determined by strategy. If I use the correct moves to counter your character, I should win.  When you add FPS elements to the game, all that goes out the window. I could be playing the perfect game, strategically, but because you jumped around and made my attack miss you win anyway.  

 

Your combat system makes strategy meaningless, and removes that entire element of skill. Instead it's replaced with some sort of a twitch reactions/FPS aiming "skill", one that really has nothing to do with the RPG genre normally.

Extremely naive post... to play quake at a high level of proficiency requires tremendous thought... 

 

Quake requires tremendous mechanical skill and a lot of decision making at an esports level... tic tac toe requires minimal mechanical skill and minimal decision making....

 

Go look at games like sc2... require tons of mechanical skill and precision/aim... and tons of tactical proficiency...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i would like a system that seems easy but with a deep complexity. few options in combat but you must choose before it, may  be like, for this enemy i choose my dagger, silent attack and poison my weapon....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Extremely naive post... to play quake at a high level of proficiency requires tremendous thought... 

 

Quake requires tremendous mechanical skill and a lot of decision making at an esports level... tic tac toe requires minimal mechanical skill and minimal decision making....

 

Go look at games like sc2... require tons of mechanical skill and precision/aim... and tons of tactical proficiency...

 

Why are you creating a straw man?  I didn't say high level skill quake. At low levels, you can win with no strategy or thought at all.  Newbie players get destroyed by the hardest bots in quake. There is no strategy you can teach them to allow them to win, they will just get destroyed over and over.

 

On the other hand, a person with any basic strategic idea how to play tic tac toe will NEVER lose.

 

SC2 has a lot more in common with tic tac toe than quake, by the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you creating a straw man?  I didn't say high level skill quake. At low levels, you can win with no strategy or thought at all.  Newbie players get destroyed by the hardest bots in quake. There is no strategy you can teach them to allow them to win, they will just get destroyed over and over.

 

On the other hand, a person with any basic strategic idea how to play tic tac toe will NEVER lose.

 

SC2 has a lot more in common with tic tac toe than quake, by the way.

 As someone that played quake at a semipro level and played SC2 at a pro level i'll have to disagree.. it isn't a strawman... what you're trying to say is simply naive... and speaks to inexperience... don't use examples if you can't contextualize them properly...

 

There's nothing inherent to tab targeting that requires more strategic skill... it's just some stupid notion tab-targeters have created to make themselves feel less inadequate... "oh i don't play those games that require that stupid twitch aim, but my type of game requires more brain so i'm still a badass"... simply incorrect.

 

Go ahead though... explain how sc2 has a lot more in common with tic tac toe than quake....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Extremely naive post... to play quake at a high level of proficiency requires tremendous thought... 

 

Quake requires tremendous mechanical skill and a lot of decision making at an esports level... tic tac toe requires minimal mechanical skill and minimal decision making....

 

Go look at games like sc2... require tons of mechanical skill and precision/aim... and tons of tactical proficiency...

 

Yah, I had to stop reading there lol... Quake takes a ton of skill to play. There is no RNG involved, and no auto tab target aim... it is 100% skill, and it is played at a competitive level.

 

Quake, Mount and Blade, Star Craft 2 all take more skill than any tab-target game. Again, tab target games are about who has more numbers, who has the min-maxed optimal build, and who gets a lucky crit.


 EOWWuhQ.png 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tab target games are about who has more numbers, who has the min-maxed optimal build, and who gets a lucky crit.

 

As it should be.

 

Do you really think the guy with zero thought put into his character with just some terrible random-ass build should win because he can jump around pillars a little bit better than his opponent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There's nothing inherent to tab targeting that requires more strategic skill... 

 

You missed the point, sorry, I'll explain it again, barney style.

 

If you can jump around pillars and dodge my attacks, then my strategy means absolutely NOTHING. The game becomes all about twitch reflexes and avoiding attacks.  Maybe "fire blast" is supposed to be the natural counter to heavy armored tanks, and maybe I am using the 100% strategically correct ability to counter your tank build, but if the combat system allows you to side-step all of that because by dodghing my attack you completely negate it, then the strategy side of the equation becomes essentially zero.

 

The guy with lower ping who can dodge around pillars and aim slightly better will win, even if his build is garbage and he is using the wrong powers, because of the combat system.

 

Of course, your argument will be that having a low ping is a form of "skill", and if I was skilled enough to have a similar low ping then it will all come down to strategy since all else would be equal.  90% of the time it won't though, not in an MMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As it should be.

 

Do you really think the guy with zero thought put into his character with just some terrible random-ass build should win because he can jump around pillars a little bit better than his opponent?

 

Honestly, it sounds like you just don't like having to aim anything, or dodge anything, and would rather substitute having to actually have a shred of skill, for gear, or some other type of advantage that isn't skill-based.


 EOWWuhQ.png 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post, why not have both tab targeting and something new like traditional RTS click and drag command & conquer style. ill give an example of what i mean.

 

The war is about to start your king has appointed 3 commanders for the siege for the 3 groups of 10 solders, archers, and mages. the 3 commanders are appointed a tower within the city so they can survey the battlefield and give orders to the groups they command. the players in the solders group are given a objective to hold off the first wave and guard the second group of archers sitting in the back. by the commander giving clear objectives and seeing the battlefield he can make calculated decisions on what enemy to target. for example he can highlight the barbarian that is reeking havoc on the archers then put focus on him so the solders have a clear target to attack and dispatch the barbarian. just a though i can elaborate if needed 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, it sounds like you just don't like having to aim anything, or dodge anything, and would rather substitute having to actually have a shred of skill, for gear, or some other type of advantage that isn't skill-based.

 

Of course not, not in an RPG.  Honestly it's pretty stupid game design when your character has a dexterity score but whether you avoid an attack or not is determined by your real life reaction speed.

 

Everything possible should be determined by your in game skills, not your out of game capabilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yah, I had to stop reading there lol... Quake takes a ton of skill to play. There is no RNG involved, and no auto tab target aim... it is 100% skill, and it is played at a competitive level.

 

Quake, Mount and Blade, Star Craft 2 all take more skill than any tab-target game. Again, tab target games are about who has more numbers, who has the min-maxed optimal build, and who gets a lucky crit.

 

Right'o, because Dota 2 isn't a prime example of "tab-target" environment of point-to-click that does possess RNG but has tons of more strategic depth than ex. Quake, UT or CS:GO and is currently one of the most popular e-sport games out there.

 

The difference between Dota and FPS games however is that you cannot win competitive dota matches on muscle memory alone. I used to play UT2004 on top competitive EU level at iCTF, and I can say it was nothing more than practice that kept me at the top. I didn't have to think too much, sure there were basic strategies involved, but it ultimately came down to reflexes who won the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course not, not in an RPG.  Honestly it's pretty stupid game design when your character has a dexterity score but whether you avoid an attack or not is determined by your real life reaction speed.

 

Everything possible should be determined by your in game skills, not your out of game capabilities.

 

I'm sorry, and I'm really not trying to be mean, but your last sentence gives me the impression that you don't like games with aimed combat, and blocking, because you just can't play them well. Maybe your reaction time is slow, I don't know, but that is what it seems to be.


 EOWWuhQ.png 
 

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...