Combat Suggestions [Feedback]

[Kaemik]

We can. My point is more, skip the balancing altogether for now. It's too early to be making balancing pass after balancing pass when we don't even understand what we're balancing things against. Get every single major role in the game and THEN do a balance pass.

 

[Buffallo]

We can. My point is more, skip the balancing altogether for now. It's too early to be making balancing pass after balancing pass when we don't even understand what we're balancing things against. Get every single major role in the game and THEN do a balance pass.

I sort of agree but think adjusting block is pretty much simple, doesn't add anything huge, still allows combat to keep progressing and fights to be more interesting due to options opened, gives newbies a taste of difficulty, and wont go past what was already working in mo1.

 

[Kaemik]

I'm not sure block SHOULD be adjusted. The fact you can ignore parry is a major part of the reason you would play archery/mage. Archer doesn't feel at all OP to me in the current meta so if melee gets better at dealing with melee I think it will feel distinctly gimped. It gets used little enough by people who aren't standing on buildings already.

When melee gets on archer in 1v1 it has a HUGE advantage unless the archer has some kind of amazing positioning and I expect we'll see that play out with mages too.

If melee is good at countering melee, and melee is good at countering archers, and melee is good at countering mages (as it likely will be) why the heck would anyone play anything else?

In the current parry meta, I imagine that mages will be quite popular if they can get through a ton of damage against enemy melee as they'll be the only quick/effective way to melt them but they'll need allied melee to screen for them and if they still need to stand still to charge spells archers firing over the melee at the mages behind them will be pretty useful too as they don't have to stand still potentially giving them a distinct advantage over mages in ranged fights.

So dropping parry could literally be the difference between multiple balanced useful roles and a melee only meta.

Of course, this could all be wrong, and none of this will play out this way. But we don't know that. And I actually think there is a quite good chance it will all unfold this way.

 

[Buffallo]

I'm not sure block SHOULD be adjusted. The fact you can ignore parry is a major part of the reason you would play archery/mage. Archer doesn't feel at all OP to me in the current meta so if melee gets better at dealing with melee I think it will feel distinctly gimped. It gets used little enough by people who aren't standing on buildings already.

When melee gets on archer in 1v1 it has a HUGE advantage unless the archer has some kind of amazing positioning and I expect we'll see that play out with mages too.

If melee is good at countering melee, and melee is good at countering archers, and melee is good at countering mages (as it likely will be) why the heck would anyone play anything else?

In the current parry meta, I imagine that mages will be quite popular if they can get through a ton of damage against enemy melee as they'll be the only quick/effective way to melt them but they'll need allied melee to screen for them and if they still need to stand still to charge spells archers firing over the melee at the mages behind them will be pretty useful too as they don't have to stand still potentially giving them a distinct advantage over mages in ranged fights.

Of course, this could all be wrong, and none of this will play out this way. But we don't know that. And I actually think there is a quite good chance it will all unfold this way.

Lol so seed of doubt is your argument but magic and archery was never underpowered to begin with.

 

[Kaemik]

We don't know that. We don't know how magic is going to work in MO2 yet. Melee works very differently and magic may too. Like I said. I want to see how it all plays out before we go around cranking too many dials. Dropping parry could be a major misstep if melee is MEANT to be slow at killing each other. Why not get everything in first and then mess with the balance dials?

 

[Buffallo]

We do know magic and archery was not under powered in mo1. We do know combat is carebeared. We can conclude if we take your line of reasoning it will only increase. We don't want to balance combat after magic gets in because you can easily adjust magic once magic gets in. Vulnerability is not a downside in a game that is intending to be fun but because it's the polular view it's going to be abandoned.

 

[Kaemik]

By vulnerability do you mean time-to-kill? Some of the words you use in that post are a bit imprecise so it's hard to tell exactly what you're trying to convey. If we're discussing time-to-kill, I found to a large degree as time-to-kill goes up so does my enjoyment of a game. For instance, I loved the original Halo, preferred vehicular combat, and cannot stand Call of Duty. Obviously, that does reach a ceiling at some point and I can agree if things were to stand as they are now forever the current parry meta is close to if not above that ceiling.

But we're talking the most heavily armored and only block centric role in the game vs. the most heavily armored and only block centric role in the game. Tank vs. tank essentially. If you make THAT feel too fast I'm really not sure how I'll enjoy the game when most of the rest of the roles are squishy damage cannons. Tank vs. tank should feel slow. Too slow even when that's all you really have.

 

[Ori]

The only thing I have come across that feels completely out of place is a lack of blocking punishment for running out of stamina.

Have Parry be disabled for X seconds when running out of stamina to allow blocking damage.

or

Have parry disabled when below X % of stamina to allow blocking damage

 

[Handsome Young Man]

The only thing I have come across that feels completely out of place is a lack of blocking punishment for running out of stamina.

Have Parry be disabled for X seconds when running out of stamina to allow blocking damage.

or

Have parry disabled when below X % of stamina to allow blocking damage

You already lose stam when hit, and if swarmed you have no outplay potential because your stam is eaten away. This sounds awful NGL.

 

[Ori]

You already lose stam when hit, and if swarmed you have no outplay potential because your stam is eaten away. This sounds awful NGL.

So what if you lose stam when hit, what does it matter when you can stand and parry all the time.

It isn't very punishing. If you are so swarmed that you lost all of your stamina due to being hit.....what on earth is it you are expecting to be able to do? Terrible observations.

 

[Handsome Young Man]

So what if you lose stam when hit, what does it matter when you can stand and parry all the time.

It isn't very punishing. If you are so swarmed that you lost all of your stamina due to being hit.....what on earth is it you are expecting to be able to do? Terrible observations.

Losing stam when hit is zerg encouraging, so is this slow ass combat.

It's not losing stamina to the point of it being gone, it's being low stamina and trying to parry 1vX (even though it is pretty doable at times) and not getting your stamina back. I've had it happen to me plenty in 1v2 situations where I can just never recover my stamina and I'm indefinitely stuck below 50-60.

Just the mechanic it self isn't good.

 

[Ori]

You hardly lose any stamina when hit. It is minimal and kind of beside the point.

Stamina management balance is one thing, negative effect for failure to manage stamina correctly is another.

 

[Rorry]

You hardly lose any stamina when hit. It is minimal and kind of beside the point.

Stamina management balance is one thing, negative effect for failure to manage stamina correctly is another.

It isn't beside the point, stam management is the key point in any outnumbered fight.
Losing stamina by being hit is the opposite of being able to manage stamina (which is a player skill) SV must choose player skill over a mechanic when they conflict like this.

 

[Ori]

It isn't beside the point, stam management is the key point in any outnumbered fight.
Losing stamina by being hit is the opposite of being able to manage stamina (which is a player skill) SV must choose player skill over a mechanic when they conflict like this.

It's completely besides the point. Seems you missed the point by a country mile.

I don't care if stamina drain from hit is completely removed and / or stamina regeneration is increased by 1,000,000%

It is irrelevant to the proposal of fixing a core fundamental issue that currently exists in combat as we see it. Now it may be the case that there are already things in development that we are currently not privy to, but I can only work with what I can see.

Failure to manage stamina is not punishing enough and leads to an unexpected (slightly comical) and disappointing combat experience that must be resolved.

Is this the part where people start waffling on about how they can't wade into a 1vX with low stam and battle their way out like a superhero again without any comprehension of the problem? Tell it to the Stamina balance department, I don't care.

 

[Rorry]

It's completely besides the point. Seems you missed the point by a country mile.

I don't care if stamina drain from hit is completely removed and / or stamina regeneration is increased by 1,000,000%

It is irrelevant to the proposal of fixing a core fundamental issue that currently exists in combat as we see it. Now it may be the case that there are already things in development that we are currently not privy to, but I can only work with what I can see.

Failure to manage stamina is not punishing enough and leads to an unexpected (slightly comical) and disappointing combat experience that must be resolved.

Is this the part where people start waffling on about how they can't wade into a 1vX with low stam and battle their way out like a superhero again without any comprehension of the problem? Tell it to the Stamina balance department, I don't care.

I guess your point isn't clear enough.
If you stam out you die. You already can't parry your way out of a fight with no stam (maybe if you are fighting idiots,) except a 1v1 maybe.

 

[Ori]

I guess your point isn't clear enough.
If you stam out you die. You already can't parry your way out of a fight with no stam (maybe if you are fighting idiots,) except a 1v1 maybe.

Tha'ts a lot of maybe's you got going in there when you seemed so sure!

 

[Buffallo]

The only thing I have come across that feels completely out of place is a lack of blocking punishment for running out of stamina.

Have Parry be disabled for X seconds when running out of stamina to allow blocking damage.

or

Have parry disabled when below X % of stamina to allow blocking damage

I don't see why we should wait to the end of the fight to have the fight.

 

[Buffallo]

By vulnerability do you mean time-to-kill? Some of the words you use in that post are a bit imprecise so it's hard to tell exactly what you're trying to convey. If we're discussing time-to-kill, I found to a large degree as time-to-kill goes up so does my enjoyment of a game. For instance, I loved the original Halo, preferred vehicular combat, and cannot stand Call of Duty. Obviously, that does reach a ceiling at some point and I can agree if things were to stand as they are now forever the current parry meta is close to if not above that ceiling.

But we're talking the most heavily armored and only block centric role in the game vs. the most heavily armored and only block centric role in the game. Tank vs. tank essentially. If you make THAT feel too fast I'm really not sure how I'll enjoy the game when most of the rest of the roles are squishy damage cannons. Tank vs. tank should feel slow. Too slow even when that's all you really have.

I think and have stated elswhere the game should recreate the offchance accomplishment it made in mo1 by allowing even nakeds or bone armored people to challenge armored offenders. This keeps the game noob centered without giving outrage to vets who also enjoy the same advantage. The stagnation of ttk is not a zone that cannot be reintroduced. It would likely equalize after the higher scale players adjust to the demand of being armored. That's I think what the system felt like it was and why pansar felt so great

Could be conjecture but that's my impression

 

[Ori]

I don't see why we should wait to the end of the fight to have the fight.

Well this is about being able to press an advantage should the situation occur. It does not conflict with your reasoning.

 

[Buffallo]

Well this is about being able to press an advantage should the situation occur. It does not conflict with your reasoning.

A little accoutrements; just the idea that it can be addressed by other sysyems than this addendum but that's all I have to add