Goblin Squad Member
|
Another interesting mechanic from TERA that could be used is a similar thing for multiple target abilities where when the ability is used, you lock onto targets by hovering your crosshair over them and it will highlight them, then when you have the people you want targeted all highlighted (or reached the limit of targets) you can trigger the ability. Just another possible method of doing things to throw into the mix.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The general argument for forced mouse usage is that using a mouse takes more skill and those more adept at using one want an advantage over those less adapt. Key board turners are considered noobz.
No one here is advocating a skill based targeting system. Just a system that we that are advocating it find less tedious and uninteresting. Something more dynamic and fluid. Like attacking what's in front of you rather than whatever has a magic box around it. It's actually becoming more common this sort of "smart targeting" system. It takes no extra skill.
What do you need all those buttons on a mouse for? I use 3. Left click, right click and scroll wheel. That's it. Everything else is on the keyboard.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Personally in games that don't force me to aim I am a keyboard turner. And I only started using a naga because Darkfall had 100+ abilities. I was using a naga, macro, and anything else that could make sorting through them a manageable task.
I think it is worth it to restate the point that we are not advocating a skill based aiming system. Even though we do re-state that almost every post it seems like.
I think Jameow's name is good.
We are advocating a:
You aim in the general area of your target and the game does the rest with aim assist, and ability lock on. Think TERA, RaiderZ, or Mass Effect.
This as opposed to tab targeting and all the things that come with tab targeting such as:
1. Not having to concentrate on your target / not even having to know where you target is to hit them as long as they are somewhere in-front of you.
2. Target assisting / raid assisting- Where you click on something to switch to the target an ally or raid leader has targeted for easy mode focus firing.
3. Click and heal- Click your allies name and the party list and then throw them heals and other positive effects.
4. Fire through players- Rather than allowing you to target players behind other players and shoot straight through them aiming at a player behind another player is going to keep trying to lock you on to the target in front. Making it difficult to shoot through people.
It's not just a "allow people their preference" situation. If there is raid assist windows and you don't use them... you're going to be at a heavy disadvantage / get facerolled by opponents who do. Healers who aren't tab targeted will literally get screamed at and kicked out of a lot of parties/companies. And of course it won't be so difficult to target THROUGH people for anyone using tab targeting.
If there is tab targeting and no assist windows, no ability to click to heal etc... people who are used to tab target games that have them (which is everyone, and every tab target game) are going to get frustrated.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I try not to play mmo rpg's with a mouse when ever possible.
As much as I'm 100% opposite, I really hope PFO allows you to play the way you're comfortable.
It's actually becoming more common this sort of "smart targeting" system. It takes no extra skill.
I call BS. And I think that "smart targeting" is a solution to a problem that PFO has already solved in a completely different way. "Smart targeting" is a way to reward characters who constantly jump around and weave in and out of other characters, by making them much more difficult to hit. PFO will have "attacks of opportunity" that make these kinds of characters easier to hit.
Yes, I understand how even keyboard turners can fairly easily point their screen in the general direction of the guy they're trying to hit. And I actually support requiring you to be generally facing your target. But removing my ability to indicate which of those 7 goblins I'm shooting at is a terrible idea.
Yes, have intelligent Line-of-Sight rules. No, don't take away my ability to declare my intent to the server.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's actually becoming more common this sort of "smart targeting" system. It takes no extra skill.I call BS. And I think that "smart targeting" is a solution to a problem that PFO has already solved in a completely different way. "Smart targeting" is a way to reward characters who constantly jump around and weave in and out of other characters, by making them much more difficult to hit. PFO will have "attacks of opportunity" that make these kinds of characters easier to hit.
No... it really isn't. Jumping and dodging doesn't help much at all in a smart targeting system unless the aim assist / lock on is VERY limited. It's more a way to make it more difficult for player A to target player B who's standing at the back of his group healing, every single player in player A's group then clicks the raid assist button, player be gets shot with a perfect focus fire THROUGH his team-mates and insta dies. And of course melee characters then have to be given abilities that make them close to an enemy instantly. Because they aren't useful defensively, they can't take part in the OP focus fire without them.
It's also just a way to switch from a tired old over-used system to a refreshing new feel.
Could someone explain to me what Blue Blocking is? I've not heard this term before this thread.
Blue blocking is when a good-aligned player jumps in-front of evil aligned players, NPCs, or war-targets that another good aligned player is fighting in hopes that their abilities will hit them. If they do get hit, the other player gets marked as a "criminal" allowing the player who did the blue blocking to attack and kill them without losing alignment. And the player who was blue-blocked can't even kill them in self defense without alignment loss since the game registered that they drew first blood.
It's something that is really unavoidable if this game has AoE abilities. The good part is that generally it is really obvious when someone is intentionally blue blocking. So if it the GM's declare it griefing and give some firm punishments to those caught doing it, it will not be a major issue.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So, in the interest of not talking out of my *#&, I went out and downloaded RaiderZ friday night, since it was mentioned by some as an example of what they want, and have been trying it for the past day and a half to see how it works out. It's not as terrible a system as I thought, but it does bring up two comments that I think are relevant to this thread. First, it seemed like most of the things you were expected to group against were huge, which makes the smart targetting much easier than if you're trying to hit something the size of a goblin or ooze. Second, that system didn't seem to feature any sort of friendly fire for single target effects, which a lot of the same people who advocate for "smart targetting" are asking for. If I had to slap a big hit box for my friends in front of whatever I was fighting, I have no idea how the system would ever target the enemy. Or you would have to narrow down the hitboxes, in which case you're turning it into a shooter with a little bit of lock-on. So, while I don't think the smart aim system is as bad as I initially did, I'm still against it for PFO.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The best way to make it avoid friendly fire is to make it disable aim assist and lock on for targets that:
A. Belong to the same organization as you.
B. Are part of your party.
C. Are of an alignment it's not legal to shoot.
Unless you specify that you do want to be able to hit those kinds of targets. So you could turn them off for a duel, or if you decide you want to go chaotic evil.
That should pretty much solve your problem. You won't hit allies unless you are aimed directly at them, or they are in the area of your AoEs.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Or just not employ friendly fire for single target attacks. In tabletop, there are a very limited and specific number of situations in which you can hurt an ally with a single target ability and I see no reason to change this. If you miss, you miss, and your attack streaks off into the night. Apply a penalty to the attack (or a bonus to the defender's defenses) if your attack would otherwise strike an ally. You'd still be unable to easily target the guy in the back of a group of hostiles.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's been mentioned in the past, but I'd also like to see terrain types as cover types that add modifiers for players using them to reduce damage or avoid damage from ranged missiles. That's something tab-target could easily add and it just needs the map or other highlighting system to exactly demarcate such zones of area apart from the "identify" likely zones from eg "trees", "hard cover of wall proximity" etc.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I understand what you're saying, Andius.
I simply remain convinced that the problems you describe are not caused by tab-targeting.
If I want to target that goblin, but I need to point my screen just so in order to make my attack hit him, then that does require extra skill.
If I were in a PFRPG campaign, and I wanted to attack the healer in the back, I would simply say "I cast Lightning Bolt on the healer in the back". That's what tab-targeting allows.
If you want to argue that I shouldn't be allowed to hit the healer in the back because he has cover, that's an entirely different matter, and utterly unrelated to tab-targeting.
If you want to argue that I shouldn't be allowed to hit the healer in the back because he has cover, that's an entirely different matter, and utterly unrelated to tab-targeting.
I may be wrong, but I think he's trying to prevent this from being possible by changing the way targeting is done. That's not the only reason but I think it's one of them.
I agree that tab targeting is Easy Mode. A lot that PFO is doing seem geared to steer away from that easy mode philosophy. But being as I don't like the MMOs being made today and am a fan of a more challenging game, like those that used to be made, perhaps I'm just bias.
If they put in player collision, and factor in terrain and the use of cover in combat, the problem might be able to be eliminated. It's just silly to be able to hit a mob with a dagger attack when he's standing behind a herd of others.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
aim assist, and ability lock on. Think TERA, RaiderZ, or Mass Effect.
Mass Effect had aim assist? Ugh. I HATE aim assist. Oh wait, I turned it off because I was playing on a PC where it isn't necessary (and is generally hurtful because aiming is actually possible with a mouse). I can't stand using console controllers on FPS type games because aiming is horrible on them. In the end I find aim assist extremely frustrating.
That said, on games that aren't twitch games I don't want to be required to micromanage my aim because I have other things to worry about like picking what ability to use, etc.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I understand what you're saying, Andius.
I simply remain convinced that the problems you describe are not caused by tab-targeting.
If I want to target that goblin, but I need to point my screen just so in order to make my attack hit him, then that does require extra skill.
If I were in a PFRPG campaign, and I wanted to attack the healer in the back, I would simply say "I cast Lightning Bolt on the healer in the back". That's what tab-targeting allows.
If you want to argue that I shouldn't be allowed to hit the healer in the back because he has cover, that's an entirely different matter, and utterly unrelated to tab-targeting.
I have been very interested in this thread but haven't posted because I have had conflicting feelings about what is being proposed and how it compares to the tab-target norm.
Firstly, yes, both removing tab-targeting and putting an aim system in make the combat more difficult (especially for those not used to such systems, like perhaps some PnPers or old-timers interested in PFO) and more based on 'actiony' combat.
I definitely agree that PFO has some space to make combat different than the norm (e.g. formation/unit combat), especially since there will be many things that players can focus on besides combat. I also strongly support making PFO highly accessible to those that play games outside of the norm (either because they just like keyboards or have disabilities preventing them from analyzing output or using input devices normally).
I would be fine if we agreed that you can't affect any target if it is not in front of you. This would take care of the stand-in-place-and-click-healthbars healbot/buffer/dispeller problem. This is already standard MMO-fare when attacking enemies, so I don't really see how it changes things in that case.
While I don't think I would support an aiming system, I might support a projectile-based combat where your projectile would hit the first enemy unit on the way to its intended target (it would defy the laws of physics to get there so long as the target was visible at the time of the attack). This way, you could still tab-target the healer/mage/ranger behind the melee, you wouldn't 'lost target' on the healer/mage/ranger every time they ducked behind the melee, but the spell/arrow/whatever would hit the melee in front on the way to the healer/mage/ranger. (I would not support single-target projectiles hitting friendlies for various reasons I won't state here)
The question then becomes whether its worth the resources to develop a projectile system, and how well Unity can do it on a massive scale.
Otherwise, I'm totally in favor of cover being abstracted out as bonuses based on terrain type, height, or other factors.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
2. Target assisting / raid assisting- Where you click on something to switch to the target an ally or raid leader has targeted for easy mode focus firing.
3. Click and heal- Click your allies name and the party list and then throw them heals and other positive effects.
Definitely if these could be limited to perhaps only formations (incl.) as opposed to "skirmish formation" ie what most mmorpgs have and tab-target focus. Agree.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
4. Fire through players- Rather than allowing you to target players behind other players and shoot straight through them aiming at a player behind another player is going to keep trying to lock you on to the target in front. Making it difficult to shoot through people.
There's some good material to think on in this whole post. But to look at this: Also another option is height with the z-axis allowing shooting over other players at a certain height and not at z=o . That way terrain for combat becomes more stategic?!
Also range bonus with each z+n addition to height up to a max.? That again is interesting for ranged attacks.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I also recommend looking at the videos for dragon's prophet gameplay, you can see it is very easy to target with this sort of system.
I'm slightly confused by the idea that accidentally hitting the goblin to the left of the one you were targeting is somehow bad, unless the ai on the npcs is particularly dreadful. It's not even as though you need to aim that precisely. Can you not put something in the middle of a great big circle? We aren't talking about a dot pointed at a goblin's neck. We're talking about a great big circle that comfortably fits around most of the goblin. Is that really an issue for you?
I don't see why anyone that can actually differentiate text and icons in their ability bar could have difficulty doing what is essentially facing your target. But it means between this target and the next you can select different targets if you choose, or alternate or whatever you want without being halfway through an attack and getting "you must have a target selected" ruin everything while you try and frantically tab or click onto the goblin running towards you.
I'm not good at aiming, I'm too scared toeven load natural selection 2 because I don't want to get yelled at for my noob ish abilities, but it is not at ALL difficult to target something small in TERA/RaiderZ. As I have said, the abilities even home in and follow them around corners, just like they would if you were tab targeting.
Also Tera had an open pvp server, it was a toggle, but it was a one way toggle to attack other players, it still works. But I think you can easily enough work in some context to who are targets. If you're attacking monsters, it doesn't take blues as targets, if you've been attacking players not in your party (targeting them) they count as targets. Friendly fire for party members is a separate discussion.
Enemies are always valid targets, pc or npc.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I kind of got the impression this was a MMO RPG, not a MMO shooter game.
I'm also under the impression the intent is to allow large groups of people to battle across the landscape.
Now, tab targeting is simple, you tab to a target and you hit, or miss that target based on whatever to-hit calculations the program calls for. While there might be some frustration involved in tabing to the target you want overall its a fairly damiliar and standard system. Its also somewhat lag tolerant.
Using a non-tab or non lockable target "hitbox" system where you shoot at something in front of you and *hope* you actually hit the right target amongst all of the other targets (hostile or friendly if FF enabled) is not only a lot less lag tolerant but I suspect could also greatly increase the level of frustration to anyone not looking to use it to blue-block greif, and is also more likely to be more bandwidth and computationally intensive on the server.
In my experiance the second style always brings in an artifical method of combat designed to *game* the server (jumping, ducking, weaving in and out) that ruins the immersion factor and turns combat into best connection wins in some cases.
In my opinion combat should involve some method of clearly designating the target you intend to hit, weather it be with a mouseclick, tab target, both, or some other method and letting the server decide if your attack hits or misses with visual clues should the attack be impossible ( out of range, line of site, blocked shots, etc)
If the game is going to come down to point at a general area, click a button and *hope* theres something there you wanted to hit despite the lag and mass of bodies and there isn't something you don't want to hit then I would expect it to be more frustration for a lot of people then fun.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Using a non-tab or non lockable target "hitbox" system where you shoot at something in front of you and *hope* you actually hit the right target amongst all of the other targets (hostile or friendly if FF enabled) is not only a lot less lag tolerant but I suspect could also greatly increase the level of frustration to anyone not looking to use it to blue-block greif, and is also more likely to be more bandwidth and computationally intensive on the server.
In my experiance the second style always brings in an artifical method of combat designed to *game* the server (jumping, ducking, weaving in and out) that ruins the immersion factor and turns combat into best connection wins in some cases.
This has been addressed repeatedly, I recommend you try out raiderZ, it's free and will give you a better idea of the kind of thing being suggested.
Formations require you to move in formation. If you are lagging that badly, you won't be able to use the formation anyway. And if there's 300 targets in range, how exactly will tab help you find that specific one you're after. Do you find it easier to select a specific target with a click in that sort of lag? Frankly in this situation I would rather be able to just hurl stuff out in front of me and hit wherever enemies have the misfortune to be there before I get trampled by my unresponsiveness and quit the field.
I'm Australian. I play at 300-400 ms on a good day. I don't buy the lag argument. When I'm lagging at 1000 ms, tab targeting has done me no good as I just get "you must be facing your target" while they're melee hitting me from 20m away. Lag will ruin ANY system.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
... The question then becomes whether its worth the resources to develop a projectile system, and how well Unity can do it on a massive scale...
It will be rather challenging to use a longbow, shortbow or crossbow, or cast magic missile or fireball unless there are projectiles in the game.
Let alone a catapult.
, but it is not at ALL difficult to target something small in TERA/RaiderZ. As I have said, the abilities even home in and follow them around corners, just like they would if you were tab targeting.
I'm against any system that maintains targets beyond their line of sight. I believe that if a target can make it out of your line of sight, they should drop from your target box. Stealth, invisibility, corners or cover like large rocks or dense forests should all break your line of sight.
Magic missile is guaranteed to hit the target you desire. With these aim systems, it will be impossible to implement. Obviously they can change what magic missile does, but that would be disappointing.
MM could be the exception to this, whatever is decided :),
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
, but it is not at ALL difficult to target something small in TERA/RaiderZ. As I have said, the abilities even home in and follow them around corners, just like they would if you were tab targeting.I'm against any system that maintains targets beyond their line of sight. I believe that if a target can make it out of your line of sight, they should drop from your target box. Stealth, invisibility, corners or cover like large rocks or dense forests should all break your line of sight.
I draw some inspiration from TT games with LOS, so I initially agree with the above.
I'm also under the impression the intent is to allow large groups of people to battle across the landscape.
Now, tab targeting is simple, you tab to a target and you hit, or miss that target based on whatever to-hit calculations the program calls for. While there might be some frustration involved in tabing to the target you want overall its a fairly damiliar and standard system. Its also somewhat lag tolerant.
Those are good points. Yet the balance is making a combat system that does not feel "same old, same old" and possibly innovates on what we normally see with tab-target combat. For me a broad problem with tab-target is:
1. Everything on screen looks a mess
2. The actions are often very cut-off feeling from the results
3. The sense of control of the avatar becomes secondary to the UI on the screen.
4. Design around eg as Andius points out withe auto-aim focus fire is really bad, et al.
for egs.
So the more critical we can be of this system the better in some ways.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
<irony>
... but won't it be <right-click your target> - select <circle at 10 yards> from the menu, and then select your favourite attack and sit back, watching your avatar run circles around the target, shooting it all the while until it's dead?
Or is that too much of a straight translation of EVE Online's gameplay.
</irony>
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
, but it is not at ALL difficult to target something small in TERA/RaiderZ. As I have said, the abilities even home in and follow them around corners, just like they would if you were tab targeting.I'm against any system that maintains targets beyond their line of sight. I believe that if a target can make it out of your line of sight, they should drop from your target box. Stealth, invisibility, corners or cover like large rocks or dense forests should all break your line of sight.
I don't think I made my point clearly, they were in your line of sight when you fired the ability, but while it was heading towards them, they ran around a corner or whatever. It prevents the kind of twitchy dodge kiting and bunny hopping stuff without just being a solid tab target style thing.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Valandur I was ok with how it was in WoW where if a target went a certain distance outside of the longest cast range or if they stayed behind an obstruction for a few seconds the target was lost.
The part that you quoted I think is regarding the case where if you complete the cast/ranged attack while the target is in sight, the damage is done regardless of whether or not the person ducks behind something shortly afterwards.
... The question then becomes whether its worth the resources to develop a projectile system, and how well Unity can do it on a massive scale...It will be rather challenging to use a longbow, shortbow or crossbow, or cast magic missile or fireball unless there are projectiles in the game.
Let alone a catapult.
Did you really think I meant something so silly as to not have arrows??? ='(
A system in which projectiles are created and physics are applied is incredibly different than a system in which damage is done and a graphical representation of a projectile comes out of your hands and travels towards the target. A lot of dev work and server computation goes into tracking projectiles.
The MMOs I have played are all of the later variety, except Planetside 2. The closest I've seen to projectiles in other MMOs is that when cast time is completed, the distance between you and your target is computed and the damage is delayed for a second or two until the graphical representation of your fireball reaches the target.
EDIT: To add to my previous post, one of the benefits of projectile systems is that ranged spells that are evoked around the target instead of in your hands and shot towards the target have a special place in the game... like for focusing down those healers/mages/rangers hiding behind the melee ;) I think I actually played a game like that once. Maybe I'm just thinking of Diablo or something.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My own hope is that they implement something where the more you move the less you attack. So... someone can bounce around like mad if they want to, but they will be attacking seldom or not at all while someone playing more realistically can just turn and keep hitting them.
Throw in an 'attack of opportunity' type system where you get an automatic extra attack on an enemy that moves through your space (unless they succeed on some kind of tumbling skill check) and attack/defense bonuses for being flanked by allies (and/or penalties for being surrounded by hostiles) and logical/formation fighting 'evolves' naturally from the game mechanics.
At that point tab vs field of effect vs click vs other targeting becomes much less important because the battlefield isn't a chaotic illogical mess. The exception, of course, being ranged attacks. In that area I'd prefer something like tabbed or zone targeting so that you can designate who/where it is you are TRYING to hit, but with the possibility of being off-target.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's sad that his will be an auto-aim MMORPG, the least exciting combat system possible. I kinda feared that it would be, due to the backgrounds of the creators from Spreadsheets in Space which has possibly the least entertaining combat of any MMORPG.
If you want an auto-aim MMORPG you play World of Warcraft. Release after release of high budget games have shown us that. Even if you get literally millions of pre-orders, once the free month is done, everyone goes back to WoW.
Another issue is of course that you have a full PvP ruleset in which time played trumps everything because there's very limited player skill involved. How you built your character will be more important than being able to aim your abilities and dodge incoming attacks.
I'm just glad I didn't pledge yet (looking for announcements on the combat system was partly reason why) and I'll be sure to wait for reviews before getting this game. Many people here seem eager to support and purchase due to brand loyalty alone.
I'm not sure where you got that, the only thing I've seen on targeting system is Ryan saying "tab targeting has been done to death"
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm slightly confused by the idea that accidentally hitting the goblin to the left of the one you were targeting is somehow bad...
It's not bad that you hit that one. It's bad that you didn't hit the one you were trying to hit.
Imagine there's a Goblin Shaman healing, and a Goblin runt standing right next to him picking his nose. You want to kill the Shaman as quickly as possible. Now, can you see why it's bad if you hit the runt instead?
... getting "you must have a target selected" ruin everything while you try and frantically tab or click onto the goblin running towards you.
This is a very compelling reason to allow (but not require) a player to automatically target "whatever I'm facing", rather than "what I have selected". Maybe this could be a simple UI option that would automatically target-select whatever enemy was most directly in your line of sight.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I understand what you're saying, Andius.
I simply remain convinced that the problems you describe are not caused by tab-targeting.
If I want to target that goblin, but I need to point my screen just so in order to make my attack hit him, then that does require extra skill.
If I were in a PFRPG campaign, and I wanted to attack the healer in the back, I would simply say "I cast Lightning Bolt on the healer in the back". That's what tab-targeting allows.
If you want to argue that I shouldn't be allowed to hit the healer in the back because he has cover, that's an entirely different matter, and utterly unrelated to tab-targeting.
You know it takes a certain amount of skill to find the power button on your computer. Are forums twitch based? The "skill" required to aim in a smart target system is being entirely blown out of proportion. Less than 1% of players should have any difficulty aiming with a smart target system.
A projectile collision system is far more programming and bandwith intensive than what we are suggesting, and actually makes friendly fire MORE of an issue. So yeah you could do it with tab targeting but it's not an ideal work around.
It's not bad that you hit that one. It's bad that you didn't hit the one you were trying to hit.
Imagine there's a Goblin Shaman healing, and a Goblin runt standing right next to him picking his nose. You want to kill the Shaman as quickly as possible. Now, can you see why it's bad if you hit the runt instead?
This to me is my biggest gripe with tab-targeting. It shouldn't be so easy for every player to immediately target the Goblin Shaman and drop him in half a second. The way tab-targeting MMO's work large group combat is all about focus fire. A competent PVP group targets each player they want dead, and concentrates fire on them until they are dead before switching to the next target. Using only AOE and debuffs/CC on the rest of the group.
It's basically a game of waiting your turn to die, and hoping that you can kill the enemies before your turn comes, because if it does come you'll be insta-dead before you can do much about it unless you have some VERY competent healers on your side. If they even have healers that powerful in this game.
This is particularly rough on group support and healer type characters. With tab-targeting you can expect bards and clerics to be the first players to die in most fights, with wizards, druids, and sorcerers not far behind. At least that's what will happen if you face a well trained and coordinated organization.
That isn't how real combat worked, and it isn't how I would like PFO to work. If goblin-shaman is milling about in a group of goblin fighters, it should be easy to hit the group of goblins, but difficult to get a lock on the shaman unless he is right up in the front lines facing toward you.
Tab targeting is more in line with the tabletop game.
Sure being able to pick any target you want is true to the table top. The table top is built for small-scale cooperative campaigns, not large scale PVP battles. Some things MUST be changed in order for the concept of this game to work.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's sad that his will be an auto-aim MMORPG, the least exciting combat system possible.
It's also the most accessible system. Y'know, for those of us who have trouble aiming (perhaps due to disabilities). I'd like my hero to be better at keeping track of combat than I am. She's a professional, after all.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Andius, I'm going to say it one last time and then I think I'll bow out of this discussion.
The problems you're describing are LOS problems, not tab-target problems.
Well then please describe how you would describe it within a tab-target system.
I know how a couple ways to solve it. But all of them involve making clunky combat system most players would absolutely hate, or using mechanics that would take a long time to program and be extremely bandwith intensive.
If you can describe a system that would run smoothly and be fun to use then I'm all ears.
Personally smart-targeting is the only system I have heard that deals with the problems of tab targeting in a way that will be simple, not very bandwith intensive, and non-twitch based. And it does it all while giving combat a fresh new feel that will appeal to what is probably the majority of players who are tired of tab-target MMOs.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Ah, I think Nihimon is saying LOS + tab-targetting so only being able to tab-target those in LOS ie any behind a target that is closer cannot be "tabbed" onto? Is that it? That way you still keep the convenience of tabbing... ?
My own hope is that they implement something where the more you move the less you attack. So... someone can bounce around like mad if they want to, but they will be attacking seldom or not at all while someone playing more realistically can just turn and keep hitting them.
Throw in an 'attack of opportunity' type system where you get an automatic extra attack on an enemy that moves through your space
That's interesting. How about: Moving into another's zone could increase your (if stationary) stamina or decrease their stamina per 6 seconds if enemies, to reflect an opportunity to attack someone close (if targetting each other each way)?
==
Andius, I think "smart-targetting" could have merit given the reasons you've mentioned, though I'm not familiar with it. What is an exemplary example of this system in use atm, I could view, to visualise how it works?
-
I've no problem with eg Trikk adding a little extra 'heat' to this discussion - lol. It's worth it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That's interesting. How about: Moving into another's zone could increase your (if stationary) stamina or decrease their stamina per 6 seconds if enemies, to reflect an opportunity to attack someone close (if targetting each other each way)?
Another approach would be to make movement consume a portion of your stamina like other actions. That way you've got the feel of the TT (Move Action + Standard Action) OR (Full Round Action).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Ah, I think Nihimon is saying LOS + tab-targetting so only being able to tab-target those in LOS ie any behind a target that is closer cannot be "tabbed" onto? Is that it? That way you still keep the convenience of tabbing... ?
I would support this as an option you can enable in the GUI menu. Especially since it would allow the 1% of players with a valid reason they can't aim (vision impairment) to play the game.
Personally I would hate to use such a system. That to me sounds even worse than regular tab targeting. But it wouldn't give much of an advantage to people using tab target vs. the people using manual aim. And the people using smart targeting would have other, heavier advantages. So I could accept it's inclusion in game.
Andius, I think "smart-targetting" could have merit given the reasons you've mentioned, though I'm not familiar with it. What is an exemplary example of this system in use atm, I could view, to visualise how it works?
TERA, RaiderZ, and Mass Effect. They all work a bit differently and I've only used the latter two. The basic concept is your computer doing most of the aiming for you. Don't get too hung up on the details specific to that system like all the tumbling and footwork for melee in RaiderZ, or the cover options in Mass Effect.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm slightly confused by the idea that accidentally hitting the goblin to the left of the one you were targeting is somehow bad...It's not bad that you hit that one. It's bad that you didn't hit the one you were trying to hit.
Imagine there's a Goblin Shaman healing, and a Goblin runt standing right next to him picking his nose. You want to kill the Shaman as quickly as possible. Now, can you see why it's bad if you hit the runt instead?
... getting "you must have a target selected" ruin everything while you try and frantically tab or click onto the goblin running towards you.This is a very compelling reason to allow (but not require) a player to automatically target "whatever I'm facing", rather than "what I have selected". Maybe this could be a simple UI option that would automatically target-select whatever enemy was most directly in your line of sight.
Well now your objection confuses me even more! Your solution provides EXACTLY the same problem as the one you're saying is a problem. What if you hit the one picking his nose rather than the shaman facing that way?
I still have to ask why you think a great big circle the size of a goblin will make it more difficult for you to aim at your target?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well now your objection confuses me even more! Your solution provides EXACTLY the same problem as the one you're saying is a problem.
My objection was to being forced to not use tab-targeting. My solution allows me to continue tab-targeting. The big difference is that my solution also allows you to use "smart targeting" / aiming.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The problem as you stated it was accidentally hitting the wrong target, the solution you proposed was to auto target what you are facing.
In both cases the shaman and the nose picker situation is identical, the difference being in the former your aim was off, in the latter you had less control over your target as it was picked for you. Both result in you not hitting the target you intended, and that's why I'm confused.
Tab targeting didn't come into it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can we all just agree that 'reference-targeting' (/assist) should NOT be allowed. I shouldn't be able to select Jameow and auto-magically target whatever he is targeting. That is the worst 'easy-button' sin of MMOs, and it causes exactly the issue that Andius was describing in PvP.
I propose:
Auto-targeting what you have at your target point until you hit 'tab'. Then tab-targeting that cycles through the targets currently within your range and 'zone of fire' for your weapon. If there are three potential hit-boxes within your weapon's damage arc, then you could tab between them as long as you have LOS to them.
Appropriate 'soft-cover' penalties are added for each hit-box between you and the target when you fire, which gets factored into the hit-chance.
That should cover:
1) Facing important
2) Tab-targeting allowed
3) Line-of-sight required to target
4) Formations matter (soft-cover)
5) No /assist or UI-based targeting
On a side-note: I'm really hoping they have both a hit-chance and a damage-absorption component in the combat system. Avoiding and mitigating damage are two entirely different things, and it would be cool if the system treated them as such.
Can we all just agree that 'reference-targeting' (/assist) should NOT be allowed. I shouldn't be able to select Jameow and auto-magically target whatever he is targeting. That is the worst 'easy-button' sin of MMOs, and it causes exactly the issue that Andius was describing in PvP.
I propose:
Auto-targeting what you have at your target point until you hit 'tab'. Then tab-targeting that cycles through the targets currently within your range and 'zone of fire' for your weapon. If there are three potential hit-boxes within your weapon's damage arc, then you could tab between them as long as you have LOS to them.
Appropriate 'soft-cover' penalties are added for each hit-box between you and the target when you fire, which gets factored into the hit-chance.That should cover:
1) Facing important
2) Tab-targeting allowed
3) Line-of-sight required to target
4) Formations matter (soft-cover)
5) No /assist or UI-based targetingOn a side-note: I'm really hoping they have both a hit-chance and a damage-absorption component in the combat system. Avoiding and mitigating damage are two entirely different things, and it would be cool if the system treated them as such.
Seems like it addresses most people's concerns. I support not having assist.