Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

[Poll] Do you want a DAoC-inspired or a fast action combat system in CU?

2

Comments

  • gregoryvggregoryvg Fredericksburg, VAPosts: 35Member
    Originally posted by Jostle
    Originally posted by skyexile

    Cant say im really a fan of having to block or parry myself, all those things require a fast ping to the server to play at the top level, its not ideal for an MMO setting.

    I dunno, if you tweaked the timing it could work well. Just as using styles after you block/parry/dodge or your target blocked/parried/dodged worked. But I get what you're saying and I also enjoy my character being a badass because the way I built him. A middle ground would be nice.

    Honestly, I doubt it could work well; and I don't want CU to be an experiment to find out.  To me, the actiony controls are just a gimmick, esp. in a MMO.  I voted for sticking with the tried and true, not saying there is not room for innovating/perfecting the control scheme.

  • skyexileskyexile MelbournePosts: 692Member

    yea i dont mind reactive abilities, im not totally familiar with daoc's combat, but i mean stuff like overpower and revenge from WoW. i guess pressing buttons to dodge and parry isnt so bad though alot of the time you can predict if stuff is coming in. it has seriously been ages since iv played a good MMO with traditional combat though, i could stomach it. I loved tank walls in WAR, pushing up the stairs with my healers aoe healing through walls, punting their tank walls around to break through then into the enemys wizards or breaking out onto the balcony. The epic holdouts above the lord rooms in dwarf keeps or in the oilrooms of the outer walls.

    SKYeXile
    TRF - GM - GW2, PS2, WAR, AION, Rift, WoW, WOT....etc...
    Future Crew - High Council. Planetside 1 & 2.

  • ShadanwolfShadanwolf Posts: 2,114Member Uncommon

    slow and tactical

    you want twitch...go play Planetside 2

  • tom_goretom_gore TamperePosts: 1,796Member Uncommon

    As long as there is a real meaning for strategy, instead of just zerging around (GW2 I'm looking at you), I couldn't care less how the actual combat mechanics work.

  • DrunkWolfDrunkWolf Posts: 1,179Member Uncommon

    I wish a game would copy asherons call as far as magic and missle weapons. you target a enemy but he could still dodge the incomeing war magic damage or arrows by moving out of the way.

  • JostleJostle Bradenton, FLPosts: 63Member
    Originally posted by gregoryvg
    Originally posted by Jostle
    Originally posted by skyexile

    Cant say im really a fan of having to block or parry myself, all those things require a fast ping to the server to play at the top level, its not ideal for an MMO setting.

    I dunno, if you tweaked the timing it could work well. Just as using styles after you block/parry/dodge or your target blocked/parried/dodged worked. But I get what you're saying and I also enjoy my character being a badass because the way I built him. A middle ground would be nice.

    Honestly, I doubt it could work well; and I don't want CU to be an experiment to find out.  To me, the actiony controls are just a gimmick, esp. in a MMO.  I voted for sticking with the tried and true, not saying there is not room for innovating/perfecting the control scheme.

    It wouldn't be much of an experiment, really. What I'm suggesting isn't a precision twitch-based parrying and blocking. It's more like things in WAR like Hold the Line, Can't Hit Me!, and Wall of Darting Steel but with more variance. Your build and your skill should both be an aspect of how you do in combat.

  • alterfenixalterfenix Bielsko-BialaPosts: 343Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Jostle
    Originally posted by gregoryvg
    Originally posted by Jostle
    Originally posted by skyexile

    Cant say im really a fan of having to block or parry myself, all those things require a fast ping to the server to play at the top level, its not ideal for an MMO setting.

    I dunno, if you tweaked the timing it could work well. Just as using styles after you block/parry/dodge or your target blocked/parried/dodged worked. But I get what you're saying and I also enjoy my character being a badass because the way I built him. A middle ground would be nice.

    Honestly, I doubt it could work well; and I don't want CU to be an experiment to find out.  To me, the actiony controls are just a gimmick, esp. in a MMO.  I voted for sticking with the tried and true, not saying there is not room for innovating/perfecting the control scheme.

    It wouldn't be much of an experiment, really. What I'm suggesting isn't a precision twitch-based parrying and blocking. It's more like things in WAR like Hold the Line, Can't Hit Me!, and Wall of Darting Steel but with more variance. Your build and your skill should both be an aspect of how you do in combat.

    Actually WAR's example is exactly a proof of that active tanking may not be that good idea. Remember those stability and latency issues months after launch (like 12 months not 1-2)? Now imagine mechanics where keep defending is based heavily on body blocking of any kind (WAR). Then add to this some latency stuff going on (300 ms should already be clearly affecting results). Add to this active tanking which in fact also limits margin for error (unless assumption is that player should block like one hit per minute as cooldown would be something like that) and suddenly 300 ms constant latency becomes even bigger problem. For PvE game and small groups gameplay it's great thing. For combat that can potentially involve 100+ players at the same time in the same place it's a bit risky to introduce it.

    Although reactive abilities (aka you hit me so I hurt you in return) would be good. Plus PvP tanking more less like it was in WAR (i.e. taunts on players, support to rest of the group, tank walls) and some real cooldowns (unlike in WAR) so you really need to think what to use next would be great.

  • YukmarcYukmarc Fresno, CAPosts: 104Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by CluckingChicken
    I want the combat to be fast and meaty, and GW2 does a good job of that. I don't want to be chipping down someones health for over a minute only to have a healer walk by and instantly heal him back to full. I had enough of that trying to hit 2200 in WoW arenas. Slower combat is a thing of the past. If I get hit with a gigantic axe, I expect it to hurt. Also I want healers to have to react fast enough to help people. They shouldn't be able to take a sip of their tea and a nibble of their biscuit between spells in the middle of a giant battle.

    That's why you hit the healers with the 40 second shield bash first! Go Armsman!

    A healer can't heal if his spells keep getting interrupted. That's the way it should be!

  • time007time007 Houston, TXPosts: 490Member Uncommon

    Slow and tactical is best!!!!!

     

    if you like anything else, well go back to your Duke Nukem and stay out of my roleplaying!  Get your FPS out of my RPG!

    image
  • time007time007 Houston, TXPosts: 490Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by CluckingChicken
    I want the combat to be fast and meaty, and GW2 does a good job of that. I don't want to be chipping down someones health for over a minute only to have a healer walk by and instantly heal him back to full. I had enough of that trying to hit 2200 in WoW arenas. Slower combat is a thing of the past. If I get hit with a gigantic axe, I expect it to hurt. Also I want healers to have to react fast enough to help people. They shouldn't be able to take a sip of their tea and a nibble of their biscuit between spells in the middle of a giant battle.

    Dude, bro, dont mention a WoW arena when your choice is basically daoc style vs. the new kid on the block fad combat system.  You'r seriously lumping in the WoW arena and combat system with the Daoc system?  Go back and review what you just wrote.  They have very little in common. 

     

    This post isnt about chipping someones health or about the speed at which it goes down, directly.

     

    Can you re-edit your post actually?  I'm not saying you can't mention Wow on this thread or you will get flamed, but you will get flamed if you lump that Wow crap in with Daoc's style of combat.  Wow helped bring about the FPS combat systems we have now, with the jumping spinning b.s. crap we have now in mmo's.

    image
  • JostleJostle Bradenton, FLPosts: 63Member
    Originally posted by alterfenix

    Actually WAR's example is exactly a proof of that active tanking may not be that good idea. Remember those stability and latency issues months after launch (like 12 months not 1-2)? Now imagine mechanics where keep defending is based heavily on body blocking of any kind (WAR). Then add to this some latency stuff going on (300 ms should already be clearly affecting results). Add to this active tanking which in fact also limits margin for error (unless assumption is that player should block like one hit per minute as cooldown would be something like that) and suddenly 300 ms constant latency becomes even bigger problem. For PvE game and small groups gameplay it's great thing. For combat that can potentially involve 100+ players at the same time in the same place it's a bit risky to introduce it.

    Although reactive abilities (aka you hit me so I hurt you in return) would be good. Plus PvP tanking more less like it was in WAR (i.e. taunts on players, support to rest of the group, tank walls) and some real cooldowns (unlike in WAR) so you really need to think what to use next would be great.

    Are you talking about collision detection? That's not what I'm talking about at all. Yes, collision detection made the game very laggy. Yes, it was cool in a novel sort of way in choke areas like keeps and certain battlefield objectives. Out in the open I found it made very little difference. I wasn't really the biggest proponent or opponent of CD. But again, totally not what I'm getting at at all.

    So let me ask. What is it you mean by "active tanking?" Do you mean physically blocking people? Do you mean the ability guard? Or the abilities I cited above like Hold the Line? Because I really don't see how those abilities would cause more lag than any other ability that effected other players. I do agree the game could have done with some longer cooldowns on big abilities.

    While we're on the topic of WAR's combat, I'd like to go on record saying that I love the morale system, and if it were tweaked and balanced, I think that sort of system would work well almost universally in fantasy mmo real-time combat. Wow, I had to add a lot more qualifiers there than I meant to. It would probably have been better to just delete "universally."

  • HeartsparkHeartspark Southland, MOPosts: 69Member
    Originally posted by meddyck
    There's kind of a false premise involved in the poll. TTK in GW 2 is way higher than DAOC so DAOC combat is actually faster paced and more visceral. But anyway if forced to choose, I'll take the DAOC style system. The dumbed down combat system they came up with for GW 2 was not their best innovation.

     

    Hello Meddyck!  I remember you in game with bot :D  You played on Bors right?  I played on Kay and Bors quite a lot as Dranzerk (zerker) and Heartspark (rr12 animist).

     

    DAOC style all the way.

    Heartspark: Animist rr12, bors, Lone Enforcer, Retired

    Dranzerk: Berzerker (kay) retired
    Dhei: Spiritmaster (Kay) retired
    Goblinking : Hunter (Kay) retired
    Moongoose: Shadowblade (Kay) retired

  • redcappredcapp brook, NYPosts: 722Member
    Tactical.  If I want action, I'll play an FPS.  I like my RPGs to allow for a more strategic approach.
  • erkzulerkzul Thunder Bay, ONPosts: 16Member

    I agree with most people on this thread, tactical DAoC style combat is the way to go.

    I really like the word I've heard being thrown around to describe this game: 'old school' MMO.

     

    Also this is a bit off topic, but please use DAoC style spell/particle effects.

    I want to see whats happening in combat, not stare at a storm of fire, lightning and ice explosions, not being able to see whats happening in combat.. *cough GW2 cough*

  • CananCanan Wedowee, ALPosts: 94Member
    I prefer the DAoC style of combat. But, I must say that games like Darkfall, GW2, etc do require tactics and a certain level of technique also. However, I prefer the styles of DAoC's better and I hope CU keeps to the heart of what DAoC was.
  • SpeelySpeely Seattle, WAPosts: 861Member
    DAoC style. There is a reason it is still king. Also, it's an rpg. The ROLE should matter. Tactics and strategy should matter. Personally don't want a twitch game, especially with lag/latency issues.
  • TumblebutzTumblebutz Henderson, NVPosts: 322Member

    Overall, I'd much prefer DAoC style for these reasons:

    -Weapon/Cast Speed over Cool Downs

    -Reactionary styles

    -Positional styles 

    -Style chains

    That said, I would hope MJ learned his lesson about Dark Age of Castalot with casting speeds.

    And I certainly wouldn't be opposed to blending some "twitch" type abilities in with the overall DAoC style of combat. 

    Emeryc Eightdrakes - Ranger of DragonMyst Keep - Percival

    RED IS DEAD!

  • SysFailSysFail LondonPosts: 375Member

    The poll is flawed in it's concept and clearly the OP is a tab man.

     

    But to those who are willing and are looking for a new variation on traditional MMO's, should be delighted in knowing that those of who have actually played Darkfall online, know that stat management, situtational spells and everything else that comes with a tab target game, can be achieved with fps combat.

     

  • QallidexzQallidexz Austin, TXPosts: 253Member
    Originally posted by PerfArt
    DAoC style. There is a reason it is still king. Also, it's an rpg. The ROLE should matter. Tactics and strategy should matter. Personally don't want a twitch game, especially with lag/latency issues.

    Yea, good points... I should've added a poll in my thread, but this one proves that the vast majority want slow, strategical, tab-targeting...

  • LanyzLanyz BürstadtPosts: 5Member
    DAoC.
  • mgilbrtsnmgilbrtsn belleville, ILPosts: 1,710Member Uncommon
    I prefer something like DF.   I'm not very good at that type, but I find it more fun.

    Concentrate on enjoying yourself, and not on why I shouldn't enjoy myself.

  • General_Dru-ZodGeneral_Dru-Zod Unknown, CAPosts: 136Member
    Originally posted by SysFail

    The poll is flawed in it's concept and clearly the OP is a tab man.

     

    But to those who are willing and are looking for a new variation on traditional MMO's, should be delighted in knowing that those of who have actually played Darkfall online, know that stat management, situtational spells and everything else that comes with a tab target game, can be achieved with fps combat.

     

    Tab Target and Non-tab target system really depends on the type of game...

    I think the Tab Target suits this game pretty well... and I consider myself a darkfall Vet.

    image

  • StilerStiler Athens, TNPosts: 599Member

    This thread is so biased, from just reading the op I can see that and that's why I didn't even cast my vote. 

    You list DAOC combat as "tactical" and then say fast pased action combat and throw in casting while moving, etc.

    H ow about many of us that want ACTION based combat but a good IN DEPTH combat that rewards tactical play and strategy?

    Just like how CoD is fast paced fps, wehreas a game like Red Orchestra or Arma are a lot more tactical in their fps combat.

     

    I want action combat that rewards people that THINK, that rewards good strategy and tactics, but I would not want "GW2" combat, which is floaty and clunky as hell.

     

    I want melee combat the likes of Severance, which places a HIGH importance on being able tor ead enemies, dodge attacks (or block) and other things, where you can't just "spam" attacks and where they have a TON of combat moves that reward strategy and tactical play.

    I want range combat and mounted combat the likes of Mount and Blade, where getting a good shot feels rewarding and it isn't suepr fast paced nor anything like Call of Duty games.

    This entire thread screams like it was started by a tab-target fan that is trying to demean and smear action based combat fans as though they are 10year old call of duty players and want bunny hopping and no strategy or tactics in their combat, and that is FAR from the truth, for me at least.

     

    You can have action combat and still have good TACTICAL combat, that rewards strategy and people who think and learn and adapt.

     

  • General_Dru-ZodGeneral_Dru-Zod Unknown, CAPosts: 136Member
    Originally posted by Stiler

    This thread is so biased, from just reading the op I can see that and that's why I didn't even cast my vote. 

    You list DAOC combat as "tactical" and then say fast pased action combat and throw in casting while moving, etc.

    H ow about many of us that want ACTION based combat but a good IN DEPTH combat that rewards tactical play and strategy?

    Just like how CoD is fast paced fps, wehreas a game like Red Orchestra or Arma are a lot more tactical in their fps combat.

     

    I want action combat that rewards people that THINK, that rewards good strategy and tactics, but I would not want "GW2" combat, which is floaty and clunky as hell.

     

    I want melee combat the likes of Severance, which places a HIGH importance on being able tor ead enemies, dodge attacks (or block) and other things, where you can't just "spam" attacks and where they have a TON of combat moves that reward strategy and tactical play.

    I want range combat and mounted combat the likes of Mount and Blade, where getting a good shot feels rewarding and it isn't suepr fast paced nor anything like Call of Duty games.

    This entire thread screams like it was started by a tab-target fan that is trying to demean and smear action based combat fans as though they are 10year old call of duty players and want bunny hopping and no strategy or tactics in their combat, and that is FAR from the truth, for me at least.

     

    You can have action combat and still have good TACTICAL combat, that rewards strategy and people who think and learn and adapt.

     

    I agree, Darkfall had this.

    However I think the system (if similiar to Daoc) would work alittle better with a Tab target system or even a Action Tab target like Guildwars. You would never be able to get side style off in darkfall...

     

    image

  • thinktank001thinktank001 oasisPosts: 2,027Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Stiler

    You can have action combat and still have good TACTICAL combat, that rewards strategy and people who think and learn and adapt.

     

     

    Maybe it just the way I look at the difference in between the two, but it isn't possible to have both.   Action combat relies solely on player reaction.    There can still be tactics involved;  position, equipment, etc., but in the end those would only give you an edge and not be the deciding factor.  

2
Sign In or Register to comment.