SLOWED RECOVERY WHILE MOVING - NO THANKS

[tdphys]

So the argument follows:

 

1.  We have specific movement based reduction of recovery time for ranged attacks to hinder ranged kiting.

 

2.  There still exists (probably legacy code )   general movement based reduction of recovery for all attacks, which penalizes

melee movement.  This is bad because... movement is already penalized by engagement,  less movement in battle means less reactive tactics.

 

Solution:  Remove general movement based reduction of recovery ( buff the ranged one if you must ).

 

 

I'm hoping there is a disconnect between coded reality and designer viewpoint (IE Josh) kind of like when the damage modifiers were being multiplied instead of added.  Maybe somebody can get Josh's ear on tumblr or SA ?

Edited March 20, 2015 by tdphys

[Sensuki]

I did post it, but it was not replied to. I'm fairly sure that they'll just ignore the issue because they probably don't really care.

 

Plus - already taken care of by the IE Mod

Edited March 20, 2015 by Sensuki

[GreyFox]

too touchy

Edited March 20, 2015 by GreyFox

[Luckmann]

I did post it, but it was not replied to. I'm fairly sure that they'll just ignore the issue because they probably don't really care.

 

Plus - already taken care of by the IE Mod

 

That's kinda the problem with the "mods will fix it"-attitude. Developers will just go /shrug towards anything that can be fixed with mods. Which is an incredibly lazy, frustrating, and nonchalant attitude that is becoming increasingly common.

 

"hurr durr Sensuki is at it again but he fixed it for himself so who gives a **** what he says amirite lol let them do what they want with their own game lol"

[Sensuki]

Don't insult the QA guys man.

 

It is partially a preference thing - they have a tabletop culture in their company and a lot of them play turn-based stuff, when you're coming from that kind of background I can see the reason why you would probably like/not care about this kind of stuff.

 

The guys up in arms about it like me are all diehard IE combat guys / people that like RTS games I assume.

 

However, it's clear that it was not tested to prevent kiting lol

 

fine

The few gameplay issues that Matt Sheets (the QA Lead) has posted about I have disagreed with - I didn't think Accuracy needed removing from attributes because it was the way damage was calculated that was causing the high damage/need accuracy issues, and I thought that there was something wrong with Dexterity/it sucked back when it wasn't even working (I think it was GordonHalfMan who actually proved it).

 

That doesn't mean that he's not doing his job though As much as we may disagree with them about the gameplay. They've fixed hundreds of my bug reports

Edited March 20, 2015 by Sensuki

[Luckmann]

Don't insult the QA guys man.

 

It is partially a preference thing - they have a tabletop culture in their company and a lot of them play turn-based stuff, when you're coming from that kind of background I can see the reason why you would probably like/not care about this kind of stuff.

 

The guys up in arms about it like me are all diehard IE combat guys / people that like RTS games I assume.

 

However, it's clear that it was not tested to prevent kiting lol

 

Which just really brings us back to the whole "building for the strengths"-issue again, and the fact that they shouldn't put someone that really wants to make a turn-based game in charge of real-time tactical combat. I still think that it's so ironic that the IE games were a turn-based system turned into a real-time system, and here they had a chance to build a real-time system from the ground up... and decide to not capitalize on the strengths, when you could've avoided all the issues inherent to such conversions.

 

It's astonishing, really.

 

But yeah, don't throw **** on the QA on the boards. I've never seen them being anything but reasonable.

[GreyFox]

Don't insult the QA guys man.

 

It is partially a preference thing - they have a tabletop culture in their company and a lot of them play turn-based stuff, when you're coming from that kind of background I can see the reason why you would probably like/not care about this kind of stuff.

 

The guys up in arms about it like me are all diehard IE combat guys / people that like RTS games I assume.

 

However, it's clear that it was not tested to prevent kiting lol

 

Yea I wasn't trying to insult anyone(wasn't the purpose). I joke around a lot IRL and it's hard to convey that online so it comes off as harsh...even my friends get mad at me online in games or whatever but when were in person they get it because we're the same.

 

I guess the purpose of that post was to bring up that they don't seem to use or reference metrics when it comes to their balancing or reasoning....

We never hear "Wizards are in line with other casters because the data shows it"....

Edited March 20, 2015 by GreyFox

[Sensuki]

Unfortunately for us, I think the combat is more designed for the people that didn't really like the IE combat that much.

 

Yea I wasn't trying to insult anyone(wasn't the purpose)

npz

 

edit: Most of the balance stuff I see from Josh is pretty good (the tweaking of numbers) - he's responding to Druids being too powerful, bumping some not very good Cipher abilities (this is from yesterday), fixing the OP Bloody Slaughter.

 

Gameplay decisions though - not always on the same page.

Edited March 20, 2015 by Sensuki

[GreyFox]

FTR I admit to being overly critical to try to squeeze every ounce of awesome we can get from this game.

[Sensuki]

Me too

[Shdy314]

Dammit. Bloody Slaughter is one of the few universal talents worth taking.

[Lephys]

Not true. Free, unlimited, ultra-bonused disengagement attacks heavily favor that the "kitee" will decimate anyone attempting to retreat.

That is true. Slowed recovery time can't be effective at preventing kiting "because engagement." That's engagement affecting kiting tactics, not slowed recovery time.

 

Doesn't matter. If the kiter is faster than you, they're going to be able to kite you no matter what. Paused recovery did actually kind of address this but it made the rest of the legit movement gameplay simply terrible. Slowed recovery doesn't address it - I'll show you in my video. 30 mins ETA on the first one, and I'll make quite a few more.

I get what you're saying, but it does matter. Or rather, I could just as easily say that it doesn't matter if your speed is faster than the melee attacker or not, because the globally-slowed recovery times while moving already negates its own impact upon kiting discouragement.

 

So, in the case of everything else being identical between the kiter and the kitee (save for the kitee wielding a melee attack instead of a ranged one), the kiter is going to be delayed exactly as much as the kitee between attacks. In fact, if the kiter were "naked," and the kitee had full plate on, the kiter would be completely uninhibited in fleeing and attacking again faster than the kitee could manage to attack again. And that's not even including engagement attacks.

 

 

For what it's worth, reading some more gave me an idea for how a movement penalty could be useful:

 

Have armor provide a smaller base recovery time modifier than it currently does (something like +.25 sec, +.5 sec, +.75 sec, +1 sec respectively for tiers of armor), then have the current values apply to recovery time slowing while moving. Wearing full plate and you want to jog around everyone all the time? You're going to be a lot more tired from doing that than that guy wearing a couple of animal skins.

 

That would at least be a more sensical application of the idea of movement slowing you down. Of course, you could STILL just use simple stop-delays. Did you move more than like... one footstep? Okay, you can't attack again for .25 seconds. Are you trying to accurately fire a cross-bow? It'll be .75 seconds between your stopping your movement and the actual firing of your ranged weapon.

Edited March 21, 2015 by Lephys

[DigitalCrack]

 

Not true. Free, unlimited, ultra-bonused disengagement attacks heavily favor that the "kitee" will decimate anyone attempting to retreat.

That is true. Slowed recovery time can't be effective at preventing kiting "because engagement." That's engagement affecting kiting tactics, not slowed recovery time.

 

Doesn't matter. If the kiter is faster than you, they're going to be able to kite you no matter what. Paused recovery did actually kind of address this but it made the rest of the legit movement gameplay simply terrible. Slowed recovery doesn't address it - I'll show you in my video. 30 mins ETA on the first one, and I'll make quite a few more.

I get what you're saying, but it does matter. Or rather, I could just as easily say that it doesn't matter if your speed is faster than the melee attacker or not, because the globally-slowed recovery times while moving already negates its own impact upon kiting discouragement.

 

So, in the case of everything else being identical between the kiter and the kitee (save for the kitee wielding a melee attack instead of a ranged one), the kiter is going to be delayed exactly as much as the kitee between attacks. In fact, if the kiter were "naked," and the kitee had full plate on, the kiter would be completely uninhibited in fleeing and attacking again faster than the kitee could manage to attack again. And that's not even including engagement attacks.

 

 

For what it's worth, reading some more gave me an idea for how a movement penalty could be useful:

 

Have armor provide a smaller base recovery time modifier than it currently does (something like +.25 sec, +.5 sec, +.75 sec, +1 sec respectively for tiers of armor), then have the current values apply to recovery time slowing while moving. Wearing full plate and you want to jog around everyone all the time? You're going to be a lot more tired from doing that than that guy wearing a couple of animal skins.

 

That would at least be a more sensical application of the idea of movement slowing you down. Of course, you could STILL just use simple stop-delays. Did you move more than like... one footstep? Okay, you can't attack again for .25 seconds. Are you trying to accurately fire a cross-bow? It'll be .75 seconds between your stopping your movement and the actual firing of your ranged weapon.

What would be the point of breakingg it down that far and going to such lengths to implement something so unnecessary? I mean gameplay wise that wouldnt amplify any aspect of it.

[DigitalCrack]

I realize most of what's being said now in this thread is kind of "for the heck of it" anymore anyway haha.

[Lephys]

What would be the point of breakingg it down that far and going to such lengths to implement something so unnecessary? I mean gameplay wise that wouldnt amplify any aspect of it.

I don't follow. Armor currently just increases your recovery time by X%. How does that "amplify any aspect of" gameplay? I'm unclear on what you mean by breaking it down "that far," and what criteria beyond "is it necessary?" you're using to decide whether or not something should be in the game (as I'm fairly certain you aren't suggesting that something that isn't strictly necessary shouldn't be in a game's design, as that would eliminate about 90% of the game).

[Sensuki]

The recovery slow is multiplicative, though.

[Lephys]

I'm missing the significance of that. I don't understand the "though," in other words. That't not an insult, either. Just a matter-of-fact statement that I am not clear on what is in direct response to.

[Sensuki]

Related to the movement recovery slow, the heavier armor you wear, the slower the movement recovery mult is going to be.

Edited March 21, 2015 by Sensuki

[Lephys]

But... that's already true of current armor. Current plate slows you buy, what, 50%? So, whatever your current recovery time is, it's going to be multiplied by 1.5 when you're wearing that armor.

 

I don't... what spurred the emphasis on the multiplicative nature of percentage modifiers?

 

(Sincere question)

 

EDIT:

Ohhhhhhhh. I think maybe I see? Is it because I mentioned giving armor a smaller base recovery time than it currently has, then listed integers? Sorry about that. I don't know why I didn't say that better. I meant, "Instead of its current X% modifier, just give it a set integer that's fairly short, then have movement incur a % modifier while you're moving."

 

Also, for the record, I wasn't suggesting "this would be an awesome/the best thing to do!" or anything. Just saying, IF I was going to slow recovery time while moving, I'd tie it directly into the the armor aspect. Just off the top of my head.

Edited March 21, 2015 by Lephys

[Sensuki]

Recovery time calculation is additive, not multiplicative. I asked Josh whether they were supposed to be additive or multiplicative - he said additive, but they were coded as multiplicative (everything was), so between v392 and v435, they changed the formulas for lots of things.

Plate no longer slows you by exactly 50% (* 0.5 or whatever)

 

E.g., plate will slow you by 50% if it's the only multiplier, but Plate and Defender will slow you by 70%, not 90% as it would have before (I think that's right?)

 

Edited March 21, 2015 by Sensuki

[Lephys]

Oh. So, by "multiplicative," you mean that the % modifiers aren't added together, THEN applied as a tag-team percentage to the base? I guess that would be additive? (You're referring to the method by which the modifiers are applied, I mean?)

 

Sorry. I'm familiar with those concepts, but a nublet when it comes to that terminology.

 

<----- Art student. I haven't used much math in about 10 years, . I sincerely apologize for being so clueless.

Edited March 21, 2015 by Lephys

[tdphys]

So I've realized from lephys's arguments, that we have a much, much stronger statement.

 

We need to reduce kiting.   Kiting is essentially a ranged versus melee problem.    As we can see,  Sensuki can easily kite with a ranged character.  

 

What we need is to eliminate the reaction slow for melee characters, so they are more able to hit those scum, fleeing, kiting  errr...

 

does the AI kite?

 

Dang.

[Sensuki]

Oh. So, by "multiplicative," you mean that the % modifiers aren't added together, THEN applied as a tag-team percentage to the base? I guess that would be additive? (You're referring to the method by which the modifiers are applied, I mean?)

 

Sorry. I'm familiar with those concepts, but a nublet when it comes to that terminology.

 

<----- Art student. I haven't used much math in about 10 years, . I sincerely apologize for being so clueless.

Additive Multipliers = 50% + 20% = 70% slow (1 + 0.5 + 0.2)

 

Multiplicative Multipliers = 1.5 x 1.2 = 80% slow

[mutonizer]

 

 

We need to reduce kiting.   Kiting is essentially a ranged versus melee problem.    As we can see,  Sensuki can easily kite with a ranged character.

Could you explain why exactly?

I really fail to see what is the point of doing anything against kiting. It has 0 effect on my playstyle, 0 effect on anything whatsoever for anyone BUT the one who do kite.

Why would you want to punish players for that in a single player non competitive cRPG.

The amount of effort (and most likely completely artificial limitations) required to prevent/reduce kiting is just not worth it.

 

 

 

does the AI kite?

Nope because unlike the AI, Players are not stupid and nobody's going to benny hill after a speed runner with a bow

[Lephys]

Additive Multipliers = 50% + 20% = 70% slow (1 + 0.5 + 0.2)

 

Multiplicative Multipliers = 1.5 x 1.2 = 80% slow

Right. That's what I thought. Thanks, . I just didn't know that's what you were referring to, at first. I thought you were talking about how the modifier was applied to the base or something. Hence the confusion.

 

And no, mutonizer... we don't so much need to specifically prevent kiting. But, yeah, it doesn't need to be the go-to, no-brainer tactic to use, and a farm boy with a bow doesn't need to beat a seasoned Barbarian warlord, simply "because ranged!" 8P.

 

But, regardless of what we should do, globally slowing action frequency "because movement" just doesnt' really accomplish anything useful. After-stop delays would (and they even make sense, because it's REALLY hard to fire a ranged weapon milliseconds after you were just running in the opposite direction, for example). Other things would, too. But, the main point is that movement slowing recovery time doesn't, and that's most important because it's currently doing that in the game. If all the other things were implemented, currently, they'd be a lot more important of points. But, even if they don't replace it with anything, removing recovery-time-slowing from movement would be constructive.