Liav said:Auto attack as a mechanic is fine. Auto attack as a "go afk and grab a beer while the game plays itself" is not fine. Cognitive dissonance between the core tenets of the game (old school, hardcore) and a super easy combat system is not fine.
I understand that tactics are a separate issue, however, a super simple combat system doesn't really allow for tactics. Not unless you want a puzzle game that revolves 100% around how you position your character.
EQ's combat system is a relic of a brand new genre. It is not necessary to replicate it to have a successful game that aligns with old school tenets. Fortunately, Pantheon's combat system doesn't seem to be as simple as EQ's, and I hope it stays that way. However, seeing posts like Aich's don't really inspire a lot of confidence in me for what people actually what Pantheon to be.
Do you want a difficult game, or do you want an easy game? I don't like to propose dichotomies, however, it's hard for me to see past mutually exclusive concepts like this. For the record, no, EQ was not a difficult game. Once you understood the mechanics of EQ, it becomes a pretty simple game compared to many others. DAoC's combat system for instance was a ton more involved than EQ's. Tedium is not difficulty.
I think we're delving way too far into semantics here so we're just talking past eachother.
I recognize "difficult" and "challenging" as synonyms. I'm not sure what your usage is exactly. Either way, I think we want somewhat the same thing.
However, an engaging, challenging combat system is mutually exclusive with holding a text-based conversation or grabbing a beer during combat. I'm getting mixed messages about what people expect of Pantheon in general. How can you be challenged and engaged with the combat while simultaneously screwing around?
Something being challenging is being difficult but fair. For something just being difficult can be that without being fair. That is how and why I use them as different terms.
Not saying I agree with the "Grab a drink while in combat", in fact I am very much against that kind of gameplay (as I feel that is a lack of gameplay actually). On the notion of typing I think we should make clear what we mean when we say typing or texting for there is a big difference in writing a short message about what is going on such as "Adds coming in on left side" and holding a conversation. And if we move to the idea of holding conversations and grabbing drinks while in middle of a boss fight, I think the devs have then failed in making combat engaging and meaningful.
//Voices of Terminus' Youmu Svartie
Yeah, I think we're on the same page.
Some posts in this thread make it sound like they actually want the latter, and I too would consider that a failure. However, that's part of the reason why I'm not on the 100% "EQ did nothing wrong" bandwagon. I can already get up to take a piss in the middle of most raids in the first 4ish expansions of EQ and not lose a single point of DPS for doing so. I consider that a failure, although maybe an understandable one due to EQ being a product of the time it was created.
Entire point of me making this thread is I really DO NOT want an afk/macro/bot friendly mechanic like auto attack in this game. Seen it wayyyy too many times now across the years (and yes I've been playing MMORPG's since Ultima Launched in 1997). Happened wayyy too often in Everquest and Everquest 2.
Strykr619 said:Entire point of me making this thread is I really DO NOT want an afk/macro/bot friendly mechanic like auto attack in this game. Seen it wayyyy too many times now across the years (and yes I've been playing MMORPG's since Ultima Launched in 1997). Happened wayyy too often in Everquest and Everquest 2.
I think you're exaggerating how many times you've seen this happen.
Auto attack and macros/bots have nothing to do with eachother. If you have such deep access to the game already that you can intelligently control auto attack and character movement, writing scripts for intelligent ability usage is trivial. I implore you to look into MQ2 and the class scripts that can play people's characters better than they often can. Hell, AutoHotkey can do that without even injecting any code into the game executable.
In terms of AFK gameplay, I mean, I think we're operating with two different definitions of "AFK gameplay". When I say AFK, I mean like I can get up and a take a piss in the middle of a boss fight in the first 4 expansions of EQ and not lose any DPS for it. However, automated gameplay while AFK has nothing to do with auto attack. As I said before, if you can automate gameplay already, making scripts for ability usage is trivial.
EQ2 is not a very "auto attack friendly" game. Auto attack has accounted for varying percentages of player DPS throughout the history of the game, but never has it exceeded 25-30% of total damage dealt. This is in contrast with a game like EQ where auto attack is nearly 100% of outgoing damage for melee/tanks.
Liav said:Strykr619 said:Entire point of me making this thread is I really DO NOT want an afk/macro/bot friendly mechanic like auto attack in this game. Seen it wayyyy too many times now across the years (and yes I've been playing MMORPG's since Ultima Launched in 1997). Happened wayyy too often in Everquest and Everquest 2.
I think you're exaggerating how many times you've seen this happen.
Auto attack and macros/bots have nothing to do with eachother. If you have such deep access to the game already that you can intelligently control auto attack and character movement, writing scripts for intelligent ability usage is trivial. I implore you to look into MQ2 and the class scripts that can play people's characters better than they often can. Hell, AutoHotkey can do that without even injecting any code into the game executable.
In terms of AFK gameplay, I mean, I think we're operating with two different definitions of "AFK gameplay". When I say AFK, I mean like I can get up and a take a piss in the middle of a boss fight in the first 4 expansions of EQ and not lose any DPS for it. However, automated gameplay while AFK has nothing to do with auto attack. As I said before, if you can automate gameplay already, making scripts for ability usage is trivial.
EQ2 is not a very "auto attack friendly" game. Auto attack has accounted for varying percentages of player DPS throughout the history of the game, but never has it exceeded 25-30% of total damage dealt. This is in contrast with a game like EQ where auto attack is nearly 100% of outgoing damage for melee/tanks.
Have you played eq2 lately? Rangers/Assassins alone get nearly half of their dps from auto attack, i think its you who doesn't understand how much AA means in a game like eq2.
Strykr619 said:Have you played eq2 lately? Rangers/Assassins alone get nearly half of their dps from auto attack, i think its you who doesn't understand how much AA means in a game like eq2.
Yes, I have played EQ2 lately.
The problem is you're citing this as an issue stemming from 1997 and you're trying to use the past 2-3 years of EQ2 as an example to support your argument. When I raided during Chains of Eternity, the expansions following that are where auto attack ballooned from 25-30% to upwards of 50%. Part of that is due to the fact that poisons and various other passive procs are grossly overpowered, which naturally makes individual combat arts contribute a lot less to the parse as a whole. However, the contribution of auto attack to a parse isn't the point of your post.
I've personally looked at the scripts that people use to bot in EQ2. They all make liberal usage of combat arts, spells, temps, and everything else. Auto attack doesn't make their scripts any more or less effective.
There are arguments against auto attack but botting/afk gameplay are among the weakest.
Liav said:The way I currently maximize my DPS in EQ is either by using MQ2 or a mouse macro to automatically spam my abilities on cooldown. I genuinely hope Pantheon doesn't have that problem. This is what I'm trying to avoid. People are simultaneously clamouring for "hardcore" mechanics while simultaneously asking for one the lowest skill-ceiling combat systems in the history of the genre. My mind is boggled.
Vanguard is another game that a lot of people love here and that combat system actually meant something. At the same time though, you weren't able to hold a conversation in the middle of a fight as any class.
- I thought Vanguard was about perfect, granted auto attack was worthless in Vanguard, but it felt like a good system still.
I wouldn't say auto attack was worthless in VG. VG was different with its auto attack than EQ. You could spam you abilities on cooldown in VG but it wouldn't get you optimal DPS. Instead of spamming your abilities, you could wait til JUST after you auto attacked and then click your ability and it would net you more dps. Rather than just spamming and letting auto attack swing whenever it swung. Granted, this isn't making auto attack into some complex mind blowing feature but it was something more than just letting auto attack swing and you spam your skills in between.
As a bard and pally in VG if you were playing your class to its fullest ability, I agree you were pretty busy to the point of holding conversations was limited. But this is why I love VoiP so much because you no longer have to type out conversations. My guild and friends had some of the best moments and conversations in VG and is one of the main reasons I loved that game so much.
I don't want to intentionally dumb things down but if there was no autoattack, wouldn't melee just be a caster with limted range?
I like autoattack, i like how i can quickly determine max melee range instantly.
Regarding the other arguments about afk gaming, i agree with Liav, it's a secondary issue. If you are going to afk and your camp/group is ok with that then more power to ya. But if you are melee dps and constistenly low on the parse ill let you know (or help you out). I'm not your personal powerleveler, im going to play with someone else.
Auto attack really isn't that big a of a deal. In games like this it makes up quite possibly the majority of a melee's dmg. Hell it's in just about every game that is not "action" oriented. Even in Wildstar wehre there was no real auto attack your filler acted as the same thing while you waited on actual abilities to come off cd. The only difference is you actually have to press a button to make it happen there which makes it feel like you were doing more.
If you are finding those people who semi afk and auto attack through, it is pretty easy to spot. Call them out on it. Maybe they just have something going on in the background for a few minutes. Maybe they are actually trollish crapbags. If so ignore em and replace em. There will be no shortage of people LFG I am sure. This really isn't a reason to try to change the game. It's more of a "be more selective of who you group with" type thing.
Im a huge fan of EQ and auto-attack. In the stream, Pantheon looked 100% awesome, nearly perfect to me.
Not only should there be autoattack, I think casters should ranged autoattack with wands and staves. I think everyone should be able to contribute damage without having to use spells or abilities. Between a lack of melee resource management, and the ability to deal significant damage with autoattack, it made casters a less valuable alternative for quite a while in the early years of EQ. People just packed melee in their groups and raids for better sustained damage and less downtime. This should not be.
It would actually work great with the removal of combat meditation.
Strykr619 said:I loved the stream today but WHY is auto attack going to still be used as a base mechanic. Please move on from this, it was good in everquest but for the love of god move towards actual engagement and not quasi afk players who do nothing but auto attack and chat half the time in groups....
Spoken like someone who never played EQ.
Strykr619 said:Please move on from this, it was good in everquest but for the love of god move towards actual engagement and not quasi afk players who do nothing but auto attack and chat half the time in groups....
You don't need different game mechanics to not see such people in your groups. Tell them to stop slacking off or GTFO...then disband them immediately if they don't. After they get booted enough times (plus with you telling all your friends to tell all their friends about them) they will either change their ways or end up so far behind you as to not even exist anymore.
There is a clear difference between someone semi-AFK using auto-attack and nothing else and someone who puts forth the effort to maximize their contribution to the group. Players talk, opinions circulate, reputations are built (and ruined) by this.
Auto-attack has its purpose(s). Players just need to avoid abusing it or pay the consequences.
Krixus said:Strykr619 said:I loved the stream today but WHY is auto attack going to still be used as a base mechanic. Please move on from this, it was good in everquest but for the love of god move towards actual engagement and not quasi afk players who do nothing but auto attack and chat half the time in groups....
Spoken like someone who never played EQ.
Let me guess you like turning on auto attack and going afk...
NoobieDoo said:I wouldn't say auto attack was worthless in VG. VG was different with its auto attack than EQ. You could spam you abilities on cooldown in VG but it wouldn't get you optimal DPS. Instead of spamming your abilities, you could wait til JUST after you auto attacked and then click your ability and it would net you more dps. Rather than just spamming and letting auto attack swing whenever it swung. Granted, this isn't making auto attack into some complex mind blowing feature but it was something more than just letting auto attack swing and you spam your skills in between.
As a bard and pally in VG if you were playing your class to its fullest ability, I agree you were pretty busy to the point of holding conversations was limited. But this is why I love VoiP so much because you no longer have to type out conversations. My guild and friends had some of the best moments and conversations in VG and is one of the main reasons I loved that game so much.
Auto attack was worthless in Vanguard.
I was one of the highest DPS Bards on my server and I never bothered timing auto attacks, nor did anyone I ever played with of my class or any other class.
Auto attack did **** all for damage. Spamming attacks in the proper order at the fastest rate that the GCD allowed was how you maximized your DPS. This was particularly true with the Bard epic, but even before that came into the game, nobody I played with cared about auto attack.
Strykr619 said:Let me guess you like turning on auto attack and going afk...
Edited because I'm over exaggerating. Even so, you can AFK on pretty much all EQ content from the first 3 expansions that doesn't gflux and you'll be alright.
Beefcake said:Auto attack is clearly in and being so late into development, it's not likely to change.
You're right. I still don't like it though. Not unless it's like EQ2's system where auto attack is good, but not good enough on its own for you to parse competently. Then you run into decade long balance issues where auto attack is 25% of a scout's parse one expansion, and 75% the next.
If they can balance it reasonably I have no objection. However, EQ's auto attack is just dumb. It should never contribute that much to your total outgoing damage.
I am sure the strength and effectiveness of auto attack can be adjusted. That is why the feedback in the early access, alpha, and beta test is so important. I hope that parsing is available, at least during the testing phases, so we can see how much it is.
Then we can have a discussion about how to strengthen or weaken it, and hope the devs make the right choices.
Its up to us to test and give the best feedback as possible.
Beefcake said:I am sure the strength and effectiveness of auto attack can be adjusted. That is why the feedback in the early access, alpha, and beta test is so important. I hope that parsing is available, at least during the testing phases, so we can see how much it is.
Then we can have a discussion about how to strengthen or weaken it, and hope the devs make the right choices.
Its up to us to test and give the best feedback as possible.
I'm more worried about upkeep. Perfecting auto attack on launch is pretty simple, but ensuring that it remains balanced throughout the game present a large challenge.
It's also highly subjective what constitutes balance. Some people want to people able to drink and **** around while playing, to the point where the game practically plays itself. Others want to be heavily engaged in their character's performance.
I personally think that auto attack contributing 25-30% is ideal if it is to exist at all. Someone else might say 50%. Someone else might say 90%, which is close to what the Vanilla through Velious "classic" era of EQ is that everyone loves to applaud as the golden era of MMO gaming.
Arriving at a consensus as to what balanced auto attack is will be exceptionally challenging.
Liav said:Beefcake said:I am sure the strength and effectiveness of auto attack can be adjusted. That is why the feedback in the early access, alpha, and beta test is so important. I hope that parsing is available, at least during the testing phases, so we can see how much it is.
Then we can have a discussion about how to strengthen or weaken it, and hope the devs make the right choices.
Its up to us to test and give the best feedback as possible.
I'm more worried about upkeep. Perfecting auto attack on launch is pretty simple, but ensuring that it remains balanced throughout the game present a large challenge.
It's also highly subjective what constitutes balance. Some people want to people able to drink and **** around while playing, to the point where the game practically plays itself. Others want to be heavily engaged in their character's performance.
I personally think that auto attack contributing 25-30% is ideal if it is to exist at all. Someone else might say 50%. Someone else might say 90%, which is close to what the Vanilla through Velious "classic" era of EQ is that everyone loves to applaud as the golden era of MMO gaming.
Arriving at a consensus as to what balanced auto attack is will be exceptionally challenging.
I cannot say what the appropriate % is. I agree that combat should be engaging. I definitely feel it should be so engaging that you cannot effectively play more than one toon at a time. Some people will try and some will succeed.
On the reverse side, I don't want it so twitchy that I have to be concerned with every swing I do that I cannot concentrate on strategy, movement, the fun of the fight.
I want my abilities to be useful and effective, not just spamming them to do damage. In order for that to work, auto attack needs to fill the voids between actions.
However, I will leave it to the more math-inclined to determine the appropriate amount.