Scale down bow attacks, please


Pathfinder Online

101 to 150 of 248 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

I'm not sure I got my point across, there.

If you automatically interrupt your firing of the bow by turning around, then our new sequence is: find target(auto-track), fire, turn around(stops shooting/tracking), run, repeat

This is not really any different than what I said originally, except it effectively combines the 'disengage lock' and 'turn around' actions.

That is not actually going to turn out any differently than if you automatically turned around for the duration of the attack animation (as I've suggested) except that faster players will be better at getting away with alternately shooting and running.

Goblin Squad Member

If a player runs away (while not able to attack) turns around and shoots, then runs some more, then turns around and shoots some more, then runs some more. I don't really see the issue?

Are they just supposed to sit there and keep firing a bow while a heavily armored melee fighter goes to town on them?

The point is they can't sit there and fire while running like they could if they were squared off against their target just pounding out arrows.

Goblin Squad Member

The only issue is that faster players - rather than more skilled characters - would be far more effective at alternating shooting and running than less keyboard/mouse skilled players. We use tab-targeting because 'skill-shots' heavily favor the skill of the player over the 'skill' of the character, so this is essentially an extension of that desire to keep the playing field level.

I personally don't even have strong feelings against player-skill having an influence on the game, but I have seen it mentioned as a concern quite a bit and I am simply attempting to operate with that in mind.

Goblin Squad Member

Another thing to keep in mind is latency. Restrictions based on facing that are implemented server side tend to be harsh on players in far flung parts of the world (Australia and NZ) that routinely operate on 300ms+ of ping.

I'm not a big fan of mechanics that penalize players who live in Middle Earth. :D

Goblin Squad Member

Keign wrote:

The only issue is that faster players - rather than more skilled characters - would be far more effective at alternating shooting and running than less keyboard/mouse skilled players. We use tab-targeting because 'skill-shots' heavily favor the skill of the player over the 'skill' of the character, so this is essentially an extension of that desire to keep the playing field level.

I personally don't even have strong feelings against player-skill having an influence on the game, but I have seen it mentioned as a concern quite a bit and I am simply attempting to operate with that in mind.

At a certain point if you want to keep that crowd happy the only viable option is turn based combat.

This is a game where movement at least, is real time based, so that crowd is just going to have to deal with it.

Goblin Squad Member

The attitude of 'they'll just have to deal with it' is precisely what I'd like Goblinworks - and really game companies in general - to avoid as much as possible.

Goblin Squad Member

Its interesting that what is a standard tactic in space based games like EVE, orbiting a target and maintaining a safe distance while continuing to shoot is perceived as a problem in a fantasy MMO.

Goblin Squad Member

That's probably because in a fantasy MMO melee attacks are expected to be an equally viable tactic.

Goblin Squad Member

KoTC Edam Neadenil wrote:
Its interesting that what is a standard tactic in space based games like EVE, orbiting a target and maintaining a safe distance while continuing to shoot is perceived as a problem in a fantasy MMO.

That is a bit of a false equivalence. If you are a blaster boat, you are going to try and close range on your opponent. If you do, you usually win. If you lose, you usually die. The problem of closing the distance is the entire reason Gallente ships were excluded from large-scale PvP for a long time.

In any PVP game, be it PFO or EVE, the close-range attacker needs to have the tools required to close range, and therefore be able to compete. Otherwise, close range attacks aren't viable. By the same token, long range builds must have some tools/ability to try and maintain range. Otherwise it is them who find their playstyle inviable.

Both sides of this equation need to be balanced. Kiting needs to be possible, but melee characters need to have a fighting chance of closing range. Tipping too far to either end of the scale is bad for the game.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andius the Afflicted wrote:

I don't know. Making a facing agnostic system seems like it is more trouble than it's worth.

The simplest method would be you can't fire unless the target is within X degrees in-front of you, and make firing a bow an action that is interrupted if your target goes outside that range, so that in order to keep a constant barrage of arrows going, you must constantly be facing your target, or you can mix running and shooting at the expense of how many arrows you're going to get off.

If people are super terrified this is going to end up with people running circles around them, then just make it so you can tell the game to auto-face you at your target.

How often should the server update character facing and check the firing arc? How much trouble is troubleshooting the inevitable complications arising from adding a complicated mechanic that has the primary effect of excluding players without twitch reflexes AND low-latency connections?

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kadere wrote:
Both sides of this equation need to be balanced. Kiting needs to be possible, but melee characters need to have a fighting chance of closing range. Tipping too far to either end of the scale is bad for the game.

You say kiting needs to be possible - which seems balanced, but maybe it isn't. Maybe the answer is that when the archer turns to run, he's as helpless as anyone else who turned to run.

Maybe archers are able to move and shoot (while standing for some time) when they are protected by melee forces, And maybe melee forces work best when they are protected by archers. The kiting shooter might be a technique adopted in many games, but kiting doesn't have to be possible. I think it might take more from large fights than it adds to them.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Keign wrote:
The attitude of 'they'll just have to deal with it' is precisely what I'd like Goblinworks - and really game companies in general - to avoid as much as possible.

You can't please every crowd at once. They have tab targeting, they have auto-facing, at a certain point I feel like you run out of valid arguments against "twitch".

This game is not turn based, I think anyone with a pulse should be able to handle the level of "twitch" being thrown at us.

Edit: Hell why beat around the bush. I feel like anyone complaining about "twitch" in a tab targeted game, barring some severe physical or mental handicap, is just grasping for things to blame the fact they are crap gamers on. It's no surprise to me that these are the same people who would rather avoid PvP, because it highlights how bad they are when they can't fade into the raid group or just grind against trash mobs. I'd prefer if such persons didn't ruin PvP for those who are good at it and enjoy it by dumbing it down to their level. I'd like to actually play the game instead of watching it play with itself.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

All things being equal, should a lightly or non armored archer be able to kite down a heavily armored person? If he can maintain distance and they are 1 on 1, absolutely. Same applies for a wizard with range damage.

Should a character be able to move at full speed and deal normal damage straight behind them? No, and I am confident that GW will try some things to make that better.

Should the realm of the internet game include success more for quick reflexes, connections, or brains? Different games are made for different combinations of all of those. I am glad the internet and gaming is evolving to include more interesting action games that give advantage and equal weight to the use of brains over reflexes. It leads more to the "character in the game" and it's stats rather than the player's hand speed.

Physical speed and coordination is a great skill for some games online and the dominate force for real physical games/sports. The internet can become a realm for those less skilled or able in those areas. There is nothing wrong with either. Unless you fear The Brain. ;)

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:
How often should the server update character facing and check the firing arc? How much trouble is troubleshooting the inevitable complications arising from adding a complicated mechanic that has the primary effect of excluding players without twitch reflexes AND low-latency connections?

You're acting like I'm asking something big. Facing is a standard feature of MMOs. If Wurm Online and basement based WoW rip offs can handle it then so can GW.

And don't even talk to me about low-latency connections. I played Darkfall from Alaska. Nobody playing any tab-targeted game has ANYTHING to complain about. This is 2014. The days of dial-up are dead.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

*Is sitting in dark corner with flickering lights, still trying to load the Goblinworks stream from last Friday*

*Looks up and glares at Andius*

Goblin Squad Member

TEO Urman wrote:
Kadere wrote:
Both sides of this equation need to be balanced. Kiting needs to be possible, but melee characters need to have a fighting chance of closing range. Tipping too far to either end of the scale is bad for the game.

You say kiting needs to be possible - which seems balanced, but maybe it isn't. Maybe the answer is that when the archer turns to run, he's as helpless as anyone else who turned to run.

Maybe archers are able to move and shoot (while standing for some time) when they are protected by melee forces, And maybe melee forces work best when they are protected by archers. The kiting shooter might be a technique adopted in many games, but kiting doesn't have to be possible. I think it might take more from large fights than it adds to them.

I am willing to concede this point. It is certainly possible to balance archery without allowing kiting (though doing so would probably mean greatly nerfing the sort of charge attacks that melee classes tend to expect). I could easily see an archer than can't fire on the move at all existing in a game where the melee characters can't close distance quickly.

As long as a balance between the ability to maintain range and the ability to close distance are balanced, I don't much mind where on the scale that balance falls.

Goblin Squad Member

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

*Is sitting in dark corner with flickering lights, still trying to load the Goblinworks stream from last Friday*

*Looks up and glares at Andius*

Ok, ok. Well maybe some people still run dial up but just so you know, Commodore 64's don't meet PFO's minimum specs anyway.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Am I the only one that gets a mental picture of the whole UNC popping up in their underwear, with bows, renaming themselves the UDC?

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Why not just put a hit% penalty for moving/running? Let people choose Miss-and-run tactics if they want.

Cirolle wrote:
Am I the only one that gets a mental picture of the whole UNC popping up in their underwear, with bows, renaming themselves the UDC?

until you mentioned it, yes. But not any longer.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andius the Afflicted wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:

*Is sitting in dark corner with flickering lights, still trying to load the Goblinworks stream from last Friday*

*Looks up and glares at Andius*

Ok, ok. Well maybe some people still run dial up but just so you know, Commodore 64's don't meet PFO's minimum specs anyway.

Neither will an abacus, then? </despair>

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

From the looks of the streaming videos, I can infer that three archers can alpha strike (one-shot) just about any new character. Realistically, that would seem to be about right.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cirolle wrote:
Am I the only one that gets a mental picture of the whole UNC popping up in their underwear, with bows, renaming themselves the UDC?

If there is still a mechanical advantage to it, you can safely put your money on that. We would be known as the Fabulously Underdressed Critical Kiters.

/whistles and walks away

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kadere wrote:
As long as a balance between the ability to maintain range and the ability to close distance are balanced, I don't much mind where on the scale that balance falls.

As an alternative to trying to constantly balance the arms race between ranged and melee characters, consider a system where all characters are expected to have some ranged options and some melee options, and most fights are expected to start with a few volleys of ranged attacks and end by closing to melee combat.

One way to encourage this outcome would be to make nearly all ranged attacks require the attacker to be stationary.

This might open up a wide variety of tactics and choices... how many volleys of ranged attacks are ideal for you before the close to melee, do you trade closing speed for more protection? Do you turn and run to gain distance for another volley if your ranged attacks are superior to the opponents'?

I'd like to see mechanics that discourage over-specialization. A combatant that only has ranged attacks shouldn't be fast enough to avoid melee combat forever, and someone with melee only should be so chewed up by the time they get to melee that they tend to lose the fight.


I agree a little bit that archers are doing too much damage. But I don't believe we can argue if its balanced or not without the AoO and proper charge (and without seeing a rogue sneak attack with a two-hand sword). My main (maybe too early) concern is that you can be killed really fast. 3 hits and you're gone (unless the attacker is using a mace :D ).
Maybe the alpha could be used to test longer fights, so maybe the system would be under more stress.

On a side note, I bet that the God mode command used in the Twitch is /iddqd.


and what if in place to downgrade the weapons damages, we actualy fix the hit point system?

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Problem with 'hardcore' players is that they burn through content 'improving' and once they plateau they move on to another game. Some call them locusts.

Goblin Squad Member

Gaskon wrote:

As an alternative to trying to constantly balance the arms race between ranged and melee characters, consider a system where all characters are expected to have some ranged options and some melee options, and most fights are expected to start with a few volleys of ranged attacks and end by closing to melee combat.

One way to encourage this outcome would be to make nearly all ranged attacks require the attacker to be stationary.

This might open up a wide variety of tactics and choices... how many volleys of ranged attacks are ideal for you before the close to melee, do you trade closing speed for more protection? Do you turn and run to gain distance for another volley if your ranged attacks are superior to the opponents'?

I'd like to see mechanics that discourage over-specialization. A combatant that only has ranged attacks shouldn't be fast enough to avoid melee combat forever, and someone with melee only should be so chewed up by the time they get to melee that they tend to lose the fight.

This is usually how I play my rogue-like characters. I fire a few volleys of arrows to loosen up the enemy some. Then switch to my melee weapons (usually double daggers) and move in to flank an enemy that is targeting another party member. This tactic usually works for me in both TT and MMO games.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andius the Afflicted wrote:
It's no surprise to me that these are the same people who would rather avoid PvP, because it highlights how bad they are when they can't fade into the raid group or just grind against trash mobs. I'd prefer if such persons didn't ruin PvP for those who are good at it and enjoy it by dumbing it down to their level.

Well thank you for that polite assessment of how I feel. I'm glad there are still people out there like yourself who understand that if anyone doesn't like the things you like, they're obviously just bad gamers and losers who should be ignored.

101 to 150 of 248 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Scale down bow attacks, please All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.