Beefcake said:To the DEVS:
The solution to this whole problem is to give us something else to argue about. Between this thread and the tagging/ksing one, people are getting cranky.
Give us something meaty to argue about and you wont have to hear about this topic until pre-alpha release.
WHO is getting cranky?! *growls* lol
Dullahan said:Beefcake said:Important and meaty, yes. Argued to death, yes. Further argument going to change most people's minds, no.
So, yeah, hoping we have something new to argue about soon.
Shoot, we just hit page 5 buddy. I'm just getting warmed up.
*is all ears* :D
Doubling down for some auto attack hijinks. COME AT ME.
No really. I think we've said it all. Alpha needs to come soon so we can forget about all of our woes. The idea of pressing buttons in Pantheon is basically pure ecstasy.
I'd actually prefer auto-attack to be the MAIN source of damage and combat while boosting up power via items and buffs/passives.
The point of it is to be able to share experiences with friends and CHAT while you do a dungeon or raid.
It would be fun to be able to stream a movie on your second monitor while playing and chatting with your buddies instead of having to maintain a spammy button rotation (not to mention carpal tunnel).
That being said, there are a lot of games out there now that are very much in the opposite direction of auto-attack, whereas there are very few that embrace it.
dauthi said:I'd actually prefer auto-attack to be the MAIN source of damage and combat while boosting up power via items and buffs/passives.
The point of it is to be able to share experiences with friends and CHAT while you do a dungeon or raid.
It would be fun to be able to stream a movie on your second monitor while playing and chatting with your buddies instead of having to maintain a spammy button rotation (not to mention carpal tunnel).
That being said, there are a lot of games out there now that are very much in the opposite direction of auto-attack, whereas there are very few that embrace it.
This is about as mutually exclusive with the concept of an oldschool, hardcore game as it gets.
Why even play a game if you're going to be so disengaged with it that it's a glorified chat room?
This pains me.
I think auto-attack is fine as long as there's enough strategy to go along with it. Limiting spell slots to 10 is a good start.
I think taking a play out of Vanguard's playbook with something similar to 'reactive' spells would be awesome. No, not like how it was after they ruined them, but how they were when the game first launched:
Certain spells or abilities would only be available after the mob used a certain spell/abillity(counterspells, anyone?) and it was only available for a short window before it would go away. When you had multiple reactives and they both were available at the same time, you had to choose one. As soon as one was cast, the other wouldn't be available until the next time they activated. Some even were chains, which were fun and could do some big damage.
I'm not saying they should copy it 1:1, but something similar to this would add even more strategy and depth to combat instead of simply playing whack-a-mole with the hobar.
Faelor said: I would like to mention this game is for a crowd that primarily played EverQuest 1 and Vanguard. While I would like to see more MMOs phase out auto attack, Strykr my man, this is the wrong community of players to rally towards that movement.
You cite Vanguard which had one of the most irrelevant auto attacks in any MMO I've ever played. I find that interesting.
If Pantheon followed in Vanguard's footsteps with regards to auto attack, it'd be virtually useless. This is contrasted with EQ where the first several expansions have melee relying very nearly 100% on auto attack for damage.
Liav said:Faelor said: I would like to mention this game is for a crowd that primarily played EverQuest 1 and Vanguard. While I would like to see more MMOs phase out auto attack, Strykr my man, this is the wrong community of players to rally towards that movement.You cite Vanguard which had one of the most irrelevant auto attacks in any MMO I've ever played. I find that interesting.
If Pantheon followed in Vanguard's footsteps with regards to auto attack, it'd be virtually useless. This is contrasted with EQ where the first several expansions have melee relying very nearly 100% on auto attack for damage.
Right. I don't disagree, as those are facts. I wasn't addressing its relevance in regards to in-game damage statistics, just that it existed.
Faelor said:Right. I don't disagree, as those are facts. I wasn't addressing its relevance in regards to in-game damage statistics, just that it existed.
I guess my point is that I don't understand how your post relates to the OP.
It's very clear that strykr's desire is auto attack being less influential in gameplay, not necessarily removed entirely. I guess I just don't see the logic in "a lot of us here played EQ, where auto attack was super meaningful, and this other game where auto attack wasn't meaningful at all, therefor this might not be the right game for you".
Maybe I took it the wrong way. It just doesn't make sense to me to compare EQ and Vanguard and say that auto attack between the two games is comparable enough that auto attack isn't worth discussing with regards to Pantheon. I'd say it's exactly the opposite, EQ and Vanguard were so different, and Pantheon is its own game. If any time is the time to talk about changing how auto attack influences the game, that time is exactly now.
The best time to discuss this is during pre-alpha testing. Let's see what the devs put in and then give them feedback when we actually have real info. Test it all day long. Kill mobs with auto attack only, kill with abilities only, mix it up. Give them real tests and results that they can use. Then, ***** if you don't like what they choose as optimal after testing.
It really is something that will have to be tested and tweaked to find that sweet spot between spammy/mindless, and tactical/thoughtful. To do away with auto-attack is to require players to press a lot more buttons. Particularly in the case of melee where attacks generally execute almost instantaneously, that translates to a lot of key presses.
The problem with a lot of actions - or key presses - is that those abilities become watered down. To prevent watering them down, each ability must be costly (resource-wise) and impactful. That then raises the bar pretty high on necessary player skill and dexterity. Auto-attack is the equalizer that mitigates that issue and all that really stands between action combat and a simulated turn-based system.
This is really the crux of the argument. Gearing combat more towards skill and reflex versus making it more about strategy and tactics. Should the onus be on the player to execute precision sequences of attacks or to know what items and abilities to utilize, and when it's best to use them? I believe the traditional MMORPG leans more to the latter.
MMOs were more about knowledge, preparation, cooperative performance and giving yourself a statistical advantage than heavily weighting individual performance. Role-playing games are supposed to be about giving anyone the opportunity to be the champion, not requiring players to be a champion in real life.
Before people protest those last statements, consider how, despite the fact that EQ wasn't heavily action-oriented, there was still a considerable skill gap between a good and bad player; even when they both had similar gear.
Kilsin said:sunstalkr said:They mentioned several times during the podcast that this game was not for everybody. If you dont like what they are planning there are plenty of other games out there. Why not allow those few ppl who played the original EQ, to have their world as it was, recreated? That means leaving auto attack as it was.
Pantheon is not a recreation of EverQuest by a long shot, it is a new game that is moving forward in the genre just like VG was an evolution to EQ back in the day, Pantheon is moving forward from both of them and others but using core mechanics and features from a range of games that worked well, while incorporating a lot of our own ideas and features to make Pantheon stand out from the crowd.
We have a community full of gamers who played EQ, VG, FF, WoW, AC, DAoC among many others and while everyone's experiences and memories are comforting to them, we intend to create a new game with new experiences and memories for everyone, so please don't disregard anyone's opinions because they are from another game, we have a vision and are sticking to it and at the end of that vision you will not see EQ or VG or any other game, you will see Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen and we think you will really like what you see :)
i have played virtually every game you listed. if you want to lose your older community who it seems like this game is geared towards then get rid of auto attack. most ppl have issues physically with carpal tunnel, arthritis and many other things. i know my gf from eq 1 had issues way back then with carpal tunnel and had to wear a wrist brace. i knew of many others who played bards that had the same issue. twining songs without cheating was very difficult over the long haul. I am just trying to say that for the audience i think you are targeting with this game leaving auto attack as it was is the best choice. moving forward isnt always the best thing, esp as your player base gets older. i myself could do it but i know many others who couldnt just keep smashing buttons over and over which to me is what you are doing in other games that require you to make moves.
Pantheon isn't "geared towards older communities". I'm 24 and this game appeals to me because I grew up on EQ. There's a difference.
I don't want to play Pantheon because I want to experience EQ again. If I want to experience EQ, I can play on Phinigel just like I do now.
Also, "button smashing" and "100% auto attack" are not the only two options. You should look into this thing called a "middle ground".
Quite a few MMO players tend to be older, 40+. However, I do not think Pantheon or most other MMOs are geared towards any specific age group. It's just that this style of g became popular 17 years ago, when many of us were in early 20s and could afford better computers. We are still the same people, with additional new people coming every day.
I work my 40 hour government job, have a family with 5 kids, and still manage to play MMOs as my top entertainment hours. Physical age does not equate to enjoying video games.
It's absolutely hillarious to me that this thread went 5 pages without anyone mentioning Age of Conan. It was an interesting system to say the least: melee had three basic attacks that could be spammed and using special abilities required using chains of these three basic attacks in specific order to get the full effect from the ability. Not that I'd want to see this in PRF, mind, just know that autoattackless tab targeting can be done.
What I would like to see is any hand equiped items get their own auto-uses. Swords and axes and hammers and what have you can have their autoattacks, but how cool would it be for a cleric to whip out a censer mid battle and forgo his mace damage to do a little bit of extra healing on his defensive target as a function of the censer's autoattack? Horns and drums could give buffs, fetishes and wands could apply minor debuffs, the possibilities are nearly endless.
Damage classes should be focusing on damage, autoattck encourages this. Let the buffing and debuff classes do something more in line with their party roles too!
Action combat gameplay might be working for PvP but for PvE and a more social group environment, the fact that you need to keep clicking your left mouse buttong or wear out your 1-6 buttons leaves no room for anythingelse.
A more laid back combat system is a much better system imo. Where your application of certain skills at the right time is more important than trying to dublicate the RTS gamers 10000000000 clicks per second.
Difficulty is not equal to an action based combat system. The only difficulty there is to learn the correct rotation and apply over and over (with abit of knowledge of how to interrupt the opponents rotation.. there is nothing overly difficult there).
No game is difficult in the MMORPG sphere once you learn the mechanics. The only other way to create a more complex system is to make things depending on other players in a group, with synergy effects and things like that. 5 solo players might be good, but 5 people working as a group should (and do in most games) outperform them easily.
Was wondering if arguments could possibly refraim from basically telling other players to go play another MMO? I mean, obviously I think there is undeniable support for this game to never be WoW, but that doesn't mean anyone suggesting something that might differentiate from EQ1 should be frowned upon or not even considered. We can still have what we want without walking both ways up hill in the snow, while also enjoying walking both ways up hill in the snow for some aspects. Anyways, the point of my response is I would rather not have this turn into so many games before it where people are pushed away from a game because the current audiance just yells at them to gtfo whenever they suggest something. Sorry, this is just something that has always driven me nuts regardless of my view on something.
Personally I prefer autoattack generating a consistent amount of damage over time with reactives and reactive-synergies supplying greater bursts of damage (or other effects).
For example... everyone is autoattacking the orc.... then a rogue's autoattack (or cooldown ability) punctures a small hole in the orc's armor allowing a ranger to use an ability that targets that hole in the armor for extra damage for a few seconds.
Or the orc dodges the warrior's autoattack (putting the orc slightly off balance) leaving him susceptible for a second to a druid's gust of wind which could knock the orc down for a moment. While on the ground, the warrior can kick the orc in the jimmy or some other ground attack.