Questaar said:
I think it's interesting in how people describe ..how.. they want to play the game. I can see I will approach the game from a much different perspectiv than most. If you're into measuring TTK, or bulbs of experience in your two hour play time, in the most efficient way, I'm not that guy. You're a half step from swarm pulling six green guys for maximum effect. My ideal group is more social, slower, more risk (that is maybe two Bubs of yellows or reds as opposed to blowing down three Bubs of greens in two hours). I think killing greys should result in no loot. Everyone plays for their own reasons. For me 8 main spell/actions and 6 buff slots works great. This is very in line with how VR has stated how they are planning Terminus to be. It's not a decision they have to justify, it's a core value they are programming into Terminus.
I'll look forward to grouping with you down the track matey :)
LAS bar with the added Buff bar is basically what people seemed ot be getting behind in a thread on here a while back, I think it is a decision they have made after listening to the community. Thanks for listening VR, i think it looks good and makes sense.
Isnt all your abilities at all times just another way to make the game easier.. why do we want that? Convenience? hmm
It should be limited, being limited is part of how you define your playstyle and differ from others, its also how you have a group leader preping the party for the next encounter which I am almost 100% sure is a big reason they want to do it. To bring people together a little more, to make us consider each others playstyle, and setup and work with each other to plug all holes..
ie:
Wizard: Hey Bob the Druid, you're struggling with heals a little so if you want, drop your root spell out for another HoT and I'll take over root duties.
Druid: Actually what we need is a better stun i think, the dps is coming from that spell caster mob, stun him then i've got this, plus my other HoT is crap.
Paladin: ok i can load up a stun, but we'll be losing my DD
Wizard: All good, our DPS is good enough atm *wink* - Loads up ice comet, but we might need some extra taunting haha...
Druid: Nice, lets do that, we'll have a look at the skills again then!
This game is not just about what YOU can do, and how many skills YOU can load up for EVERY occasion, it is about being a team and having these conversations to organise your group to progress to the best of your groups class makeup.
I am going to have to disagree with several here and say I approve of the limited action bar. Perhaps 8 skills is too limited, but that is something that should be able to be ironed out in Alpha testing. Part of what made GW1 excellent was having limited selection of 8 abilities but that was a PvP focused game so that extremely limited skill bar made it much easier to balance. I think that in a PvE focused game players should have access to more skills, maybe 12? Maybe even up to 20 depending on how good class balance is. A lot of the players here are hardcore gamers like myself and while I understand they despise gameplay limitations I also understand that ability creep can make a game unfun or even unplayable for people who are not experts at the game. Regular players aren't gonna manage 20+ abilities on the fly. Most players don't have a fancy gaming mouse nor are they slick with their hotkey management. No ability cap and no memorizing can also mean serious balance issues even in PvE when a skilled player knows how to use every single ability and can exploit certain classes...and of course that leads to nasty nerfs.
I've seen arguments in this thread about not being able to cure debuffs like poison, or having to cast buffs then remem other skills before the fight. I can explain the dynamics of it with an example: One cleric may decide to enter fights with 6 of their skillslots filled with buffs and dispels and only 2 healing spells while another chooses various damage spells and only 1 dispel and one heal spell. Or maybe a group has 3 clerics in it...and each one decides to line up different skills to cover all the bases? Remember there will not be a talent tree system in Pantheon. Yes maybe there will be a situation (like someone mentioned) where a respawn happens and the group with one cleric doesn't have root spell or cure poison memorized. I don't see that as a bad thing necessarily, it means sometimes the group will end up fighting things they are not optimized against, it means players will have weaknesses.
Speaking of core values and design decisions ... I was able to dig up one of my older posts where I found a quote from Brad that touches on this topic:
oneADseven said:From Aradune:
"...I can reveal what we are generally trying to accomplish and the vision and thinking behind it, but it's too early to set number of slots or anything else in stone, specifics and the like.
Fundamentally, what we're shooting for here is needing to plan for that next encounter, especially significant encounters (boss mobs and the like). There should be a noticeable reward for prepping for an encounter properly vs. just running into combat without any forethought or tactics.
There ideally shouldn't be a set of abilities that is always optimal. It should change depending on where you are and what you are going up against.
We don't want it to be so key that you are messing with your character's configuration all of the time (needlessly tedious). Also any type of reconfiguration of your character, or anything really that you may end up doing relatively frequently needs to be supported by an intuitive and easy to use UI and interface. But on the opposite extreme we do want people to learn about encounters, figure out tactics, etc. again the more so the more significant the mob. As you learn a dungeon and master its significant or special encounters a big part of that process should be learning what kind of defensive and offensive capabilities these mobs have. Also, their disposition and behaviors. Running in blind or with minimal planning should put you at a disadvantage vs. the party that *did* plan.
Of course, this extends beyond spells that you mem. Situational gear should play a part as well. Relics and artifacts should play an important role in the big fights. Your group composition and how you work with others and not just individually should matter too. The buffs you apply to yourself and party should matter. Group positioning (both initial positioning and then re-positioning either based on a plan or in reaction to something the mob did or is about to do), depending on class, DPS, ability to tank or off-tank, etc. should be very important. What we're trying to implement and reward are real tactics that give you an advantage over the party who just rushes in blindly with little to no thoughtful preparation. In MMOs your characters abilities, items, etc. generally matter a lot. Then comes buffs. Then eventually actual tactics.
I personally don't see one necessarily always being more important than the other. Certainly, the items you are using, how you are buffed, etc. should matter a *lot*. Pantheon will always be an item-centric and 'ability important' game. But that by no means is a scenario where, at any given level, there's one optimal configuration and as long as you adhere to it, you'll be in good shape. Items, stats, buffs, etc. will always be extremely important. Having that optimal configuration vary depending on who you are, where you are, who you are with, etc. is very important to us -- no 'one size fits all'."
The main takeaway I observed from the above:
There are a variety of ways to intelligently plan for the battle ahead, including: Situational Gear, relics/artifacts, group composition, buff selection, positioning/repositioning, synergy, and tactics. That list isn't comprehensive because I think all of the following would also apply: Resource management, available cooldowns, timing, communication, crowd control, role assignments, primary/secondary/tertiary objectives, NPC archetype/disposition consideration, line of sight, situational awareness with respawns or pathers, climate/environment, and pulling strategy. (Can you split the encounter up? Do you need to utilize mezz/lull?) The need to plan ahead can be realized without funneling preparation through the LAS. Buff selection is supposed to matter a lot. A concentration mechanic would be good for the buffing classes but should probably be avoided for non-buffing classes in order to prevent it from feeling like a gimmick for most classes, like it did in EQ2. A bunch of classes had a variety of buffs forced into their arsenal in order to justify the existence of their available concentration slots but in the end, it only contributed to the hotbar bloat. The vast majority of those buffs could have been passive, without an icon, and the game wouldn't have been played any differently.
The LAS is not a make-or-break mechanic that the entire combat system is designed around. It's an element, for sure, but it's not necessarily more important than any of the others, at least not in the sense that meaningful preparation cannot occur without it. Seeing that buffs are supposed to be a major consideration of the preparation phase, I would again cite what has been described as "LAS Circumvention" as a legitimate issue. The good news is that long-term buffs can remain, and that there can still be a heavy emphasis on planning for the upcoming battle. Players can still enjoy a sense of "soft-specialization" by utilizing situational gear, intelligently planned buffs, and playing around the stat modifiers that are listed in the various ability descriptions. Pantheon is supposed to be an evolved MMO and the combat system as a whole is going to be a major factor when it comes time for players to render a verdict. I expect pioneering more than emulating when it comes to combat, specifically.
It's an interesting topic because according to the above, the buffs that players use should matter. That obviously wasn't the case in EQ. You could use all of your buffs and then replace them with other spells on your bar. This is what I have referred to as "LAS Circumvention." If buff choices are supposed to matter then VR could very easily reproduce the "concentration mechanic" that we have seen in several previous MMO's. Classes would have access to a variety of buffs/stances that require a concentration slot, but those concentration slots are limited. They would have to make this/that choices. I understand the concerns people have about seeing 96 abilities on their screen. That isn't something I would want to see either. But 2-3 bars? That's going to be a lot more engaging. I think it's important that each class has a variety of abilities that have longer cooldowns, that they are always available, and that the world is constructed in a way where those abilities are consistently required to survive incoming surprise challenges (dynamic combat.) This would ensure that there is risk/reward for when we use them.
I am not a fan of the idea of always having to predict what makes the most sense for a fight. That sounds dreadful. For those who think that we'll be able to swap abilities around while "in-combat" I think you are mistaken. Pantheon seems to be taking a different approach than what was observed in EQ. There are many abilities that require an in or out combat state. If, for example, a ranger could have "Silent Arrow" on their bar at the beginning of the fight, and use it to engage ... only to replace it with something else afterward (since it can only be used once per fight due to the out-of-combat requirement) -- what is the point of having the LAS? That would encourage players to spend more time shuffling around in their spell book (circumvention-based-micro-play) and less time focused on what's going on in the world directly around them.
since it got delete by kilsin, i think las12 with uas6 is pretty fair.
that way healers have more flexibility and classes the require multitargeting, like bards, druids and enchanters could breathe a bit. these archtypes have always required more apm to work effectively.
players that want a smaller las have to consider how it's going to affect other roles. i know dps in particular, doesn't require as many unique actions. i'd like more ways for player expression to come out. being able to execute is part of that.
if there were only 2 buttons we could press, a punch and a block, there isn't much to distinguish two players from one another and is how players with higher apm are going to feel.
an average gamer can probably pump out 60apm, not including targeting apm. that's about the las12 uas6 level of control.
i understand the idea is to build class interdependency. unless u want to die and hear ur cc, tanks and healers say, 'well if i had another 4 action slots, we wouldn't have wiped.
actually even better idea
dps gets las8 uas6
tanks and cc gets las 10 uas6
healers get las12 uas 6
there that sounds good to me.
I have been following this topic since I first joined the community. In order to improve the quality of this discussion I think it's important for VR to clarify a few things:
1) How does the LAS model reinforce the core tenets of Pantheon?
2) What is the primary purpose of the main hotbar?
3) What is the main purpose of the utility bar and why was it added?
From my perspective, the LAS has a negative impact on the following game tenets:
1) "A requirement that classes have identities. No single player should be able to do everything on their own."
Every class falls under a shared-archetype umbrella. Pantheon has always been dubbed as a group-centric and role-interdependent game. In order to satisfy a given role, every class will be required to commit a sizable portion of their bar to role-defining abilities. This leaves very little wiggle room for the unique identity of each class to shine since it's imperative that they first meet the established criteria of fulfilling their role.
2) "A commitment to a style of play that focuses on immersive combat, and engaging group mechanics."
The LAS is a non-starter when it comes to immersive combat, for me. I cannot imagine a less-immersive combat situation than being in a position where using ability X would save my party but it's unavailable since I don't have it memorized. The LAS feels more like a turn-based card game where I have to prepare a new deck before each "game" or "encounter that is worth preparing for."
3) "An understanding that a truly challenging game is truly rewarding."
If challenge (in this context) is supposed to be defined as knowing which ability to have prepared before engaging in combat, that challenge can be circumvented by reading up on one of the many guides that will inevitably become available post-launch. After hearing the rationale behind the many branching narratives and conditional flagging of the perception system, I can't help but wish that the same logic (dissuading the effectiveness of following a guide or spoiler) was being applied to combat. As a point of reference, here is the quote from Joppa: "The goal there (perception implementation) is to try and make this not only a very deep system with a lot of replayability, but also to protect against things like spoilers ... because there will be such a richness of flagging and a variety of different things that a player has done that it will often be difficult to determine exactly what steps were taken to get to this point and that point. That is why we have decided to separate the perception system from the leveling mechanic ... or, we haven't put content behind the perception system as a kind of wall ... because we don't want players to be impatient or feel like they're being held back because maybe they can't quite determine the steps that it's going to take to do this next thing or that next thing. Even though ... our job will be to make sure that the clues that are presented are adequate enough, but maybe in an ideal situation, you're actually reaching out to other people around you and asking questions to help make sense of some of these things which is part of the social engagement that we're going for."
Less active abilities automatically translate to less active responsibilities. When it comes to this FAQ excerpt, the LAS is absolutely contradictive to the type of combat that Pantheon seeks to achieve:
"We want to make combat, especially mid and higher level combat, so tactically intense, with so much going on, so much to do, so much to counter, so many companions to keep alive and the timing of many abilities crucial, that multi-boxing is extremely difficult if not impossible and likely far inferior to having an actual real person in your group."
Try reading that phrase out loud and then explain how the LAS contributes to a style of combat that is tactically intense, with so much going on, so much to do, so much to counter, so many companions to keep alive and the timing of many abilities crucial, that multi-boxing is extremely difficult if not impossible and likely far inferior to having an actual real person in your group. EQ had quite the reputation for being multi-box friendly. Some players went out of their way to multi-box for the sake of experiencing a challenge in the first place. How do we go from one extreme (multi-boxing is notoriously easy) to the other (multi-boxing is extremely difficult if not impossible) without fundamentally changing combat? How is a limited action set conducive to the style of tactically intense combat that has been advertised in that excerpt? That excerpt has been around since 02/2017 and was quoted alongside an "Our stance hasn't changed" comment just a few days ago. I would argue that the hard LAS restriction (unlike EQ where you could still swap abilities while in-combat) only serves to make combat more multi-box friendly by putting even more weight and efficiency on the pre-engage (safe) phase of combat.
Another excerpt from the FAQ that reinforces the above:
13.1.1 Does Pantheon use tab-targeting and auto-attack or a more ‘action’ focused combat system?
"We realize that some MMOs have used a more ‘action’ oriented combat system, where you click on different buttons to attack, swing your sword, dodge, etc. With Pantheon, combat will still be action-packed and require close attention, using tactics, as well as reacting to what mobs and other players may be doing. In fact, so much will be going on that you will not want to have to worry about whether you are swinging your sword or not -- you will be casting spells, assuming stances, countering or deflecting your opponent’s moves and spells, and more. Additionally, while you can either click directly on a mob or simply use the tab key to change targets, there will also be a subset of spells where you can target the ground (for example, some area-of-effect spells)."
This reinforces the previous excerpt and suggests that combat will be "action-packed" and require you to pay close attention, using tactics, as well as reacting to what mobs and other players may be doing. This is exactly what people have been advocating for in this thread. There should be so much going on during combat that the added complexity of an "action combat game" that requires specific button presses for swinging your sword and dodging doesn't feel necessary to enjoy highly engaging, intensely tactical, and action-packed gameplay in Pantheon.
4) An understanding that player involvement is required for progression. All actions (or lack thereof) should have consequences. Positive actions should be rewarded. Apathy or lack of action should not be rewarded with bonuses.
A limited action set sounds exactly like a (lack thereof) when it comes to action. A limited action set places an enormous amount of value on pre-combat planning which does, in fact, translate to "action" in a sense. Changing your hotbar would qualify as a positive action ... but then again, this also leads to a world that is highly predictable and scripted. If putting the right abilities on my hotbar is viewed as a positive action then I am encouraged to follow the path of least resistance (apathy) and nail that set-up before any major boss. Preparing the right bar is supposed to be challenging so it is then a very positive action to do my research and have the "right bar" spelled out for me. Once the tactics and strategies are figured out and shared with the world wide web, it would be irresponsible for me as a player to place an unnecessary burden on my group by not taking advantage of these strategy guides. I say this loosely because I'll most likely be playing pretty hardcore and experiencing content on the cutting edge before guides exist, but the eventual existence of those guides will seep out and affect many players, even those who purposely avoid them. When you have a meaningful death penalty that is shared by a group who is counting on you to function at a high level in a specific role, it's worth considering the idea that they will do advanced research for their own benefit, which then extends to you. "Hey there, the ideal ability set for this upcoming fight (for your class) is A/B/D/G/K/O/T/W. Please use those abilities so that we can be optimal with our time and avoid unnecessary wiping."
Now ... I understand that there are a few other tenets that seem to reinforce the idea behind the LAS:
"A mindset that some degree of downtime should be part of a game, ensuring players have time to form important social bonds."
Downtime can exist outside of the confines of an LAS. If anybody thinks that an LAS somehow translates to positive downtime or important social bonds, please check out ESO, GW2, Wildstar, etc ... and then compare those games to something like FFXI. (I'm pretty sure FFXI had more downtime and bond-inducing gameplay than those other 3 games combined.) Could the LAS contribute toward this tenet? Yes, but so could an in-game tinder app. Is the LAS necessary to achieve this tenet, though? No, just like an in-game tinder app.
"A sincere commitment to creating a world where a focus on cooperative play will attract those seeking a challenge."
I seek challenge and a focus on cooperative play but the LAS doesn't really resonate with me. To be fair, I understand that my post is subjective.
My final comment for this post is #WorldsNotGames -- Will NPC class trainers have to memorize and forget abilities when they teach them to players or are they exempt from this game mechanic? (Rhetorical question.) Will there be friendly NPC banter where a local brags about beating up bad guy C without having abilities X/Y/Z memorized, properly capturing the emergent hard-mode version of content that the game is offering to the world? Or will that NPC brag about how smart and witty they are for memorizing abilities X/Y/Z, the clear optimal choice for big brains? I understand that my post may come off as satirical or that my criticism might seem unfairly applied. I welcome any dialogue with others who would like to respond to the points I have made here. I understand that gameplay mechanics are sometimes necessary for a fun, social, cooperative or challenging game ... which is why the answers to the first few questions I posed could really improve the quality of this discussion.
Hokanu said:LAS bar with the added Buff bar is basically what people seemed ot be getting behind in a thread on here a while back, I think it is a decision they have made after listening to the community. Thanks for listening VR, i think it looks good and makes sense.
Isnt all your abilities at all times just another way to make the game easier.. why do we want that? Convenience? hmm
It should be limited, being limited is part of how you define your playstyle and differ from others, its also how you have a group leader preping the party for the next encounter which I am almost 100% sure is a big reason they want to do it. To bring people together a little more, to make us consider each others playstyle, and setup and work with each other to plug all holes..
ie:
Wizard: Hey Bob the Druid, you're struggling with heals a little so if you want, drop your root spell out for another HoT and I'll take over root duties.
Druid: Actually what we need is a better stun i think, the dps is coming from that spell caster mob, stun him then i've got this, plus my other HoT is crap.
Paladin: ok i can load up a stun, but we'll be losing my DD
Wizard: All good, our DPS is good enough atm *wink* - Loads up ice comet, but we might need some extra taunting haha...
Druid: Nice, lets do that, we'll have a look at the skills again then!
This game is not just about what YOU can do, and how many skills YOU can load up for EVERY occasion, it is about being a team and having these conversations to organise your group to progress to the best of your groups class makeup.
This is yet another argument for LAS that actually details exactly what is wrong with it, layered on top of logical fallacies. Nothing you detailed requires the LAS. For every scenario you can make up where it promotes communication, I can make one up where it doesn't or where having no LAS or a less severe one promotes it even further.
Additionally, if you consider having an LAS to be more "challenging" think about how it restricts what VR is able to do with encounter design. Instead of making encounters themselves more sophisticated, more difficult, they instead place an arbitrary limit on what players are able to do. This is difficulty achieved through constraint, instead of through design. Wouldn't you rather face a more dynamic combat encounter, one where you were allowed to make meaningful decisions on the fly, instead of "preparing" for a much more limited encounter, one you are only preparing for because you already know exactly what's going to happen. That's not challenge. The argument that fewer options makes decisions more difficult or more meaningful is absurd. The idea that communication will be required more often, or will be more important, when people have fewer abilities, is absurd. If there is one person who is rooting, one who is mezzing, one who is stunning, etc, there is no need for them to have any kind of dialogue during combat.
It doesn't make a player smarter or better to buff cold resist against the mob that casts ice comet, or to mem root instead of mez against the mob they know is CC immune. Nor is it fun to simply be unlucky because a mob spawned with a disposition that counters your group's load out. You weren't a worse player, you were just unlucky. That is poor design. Dispositions and LAS are an anti-synergy.
What about when things go sideways in combat and you have options to make split second decisions to decide the outcome? That is destroyed with LAS. It is *not* more tactical, it is *not* more challening, it does *not* promote more social interactions and communication.
Keno Monster said:Hokanu said:LAS bar with the added Buff bar is basically what people seemed ot be getting behind in a thread on here a while back, I think it is a decision they have made after listening to the community. Thanks for listening VR, i think it looks good and makes sense.
Isnt all your abilities at all times just another way to make the game easier.. why do we want that? Convenience? hmm
It should be limited, being limited is part of how you define your playstyle and differ from others, its also how you have a group leader preping the party for the next encounter which I am almost 100% sure is a big reason they want to do it. To bring people together a little more, to make us consider each others playstyle, and setup and work with each other to plug all holes..
ie:
Wizard: Hey Bob the Druid, you're struggling with heals a little so if you want, drop your root spell out for another HoT and I'll take over root duties.
Druid: Actually what we need is a better stun i think, the dps is coming from that spell caster mob, stun him then i've got this, plus my other HoT is crap.
Paladin: ok i can load up a stun, but we'll be losing my DD
Wizard: All good, our DPS is good enough atm *wink* - Loads up ice comet, but we might need some extra taunting haha...
Druid: Nice, lets do that, we'll have a look at the skills again then!
This game is not just about what YOU can do, and how many skills YOU can load up for EVERY occasion, it is about being a team and having these conversations to organise your group to progress to the best of your groups class makeup.
This is yet another argument for LAS that actually details exactly what is wrong with it, layered on top of logical fallacies. Nothing you detailed requires the LAS. For every scenario you can make up where it promotes communication, I can make one up where it doesn't or where having no LAS or a less severe one promotes it even further.
Additionally, if you consider having an LAS to be more "challenging" think about how it restricts what VR is able to do with encounter design. Instead of making encounters themselves more sophisticated, more difficult, they instead place an arbitrary limit on what players are able to do. This is difficulty achieved through constraint, instead of through design. Wouldn't you rather face a more dynamic combat encounter, one where you were allowed to make meaningful decisions on the fly, instead of "preparing" for a much more limited encounter, one you are only preparing for because you already know exactly what's going to happen. That's not challenge. The argument that fewer options makes decisions more difficult or more meaningful is absurd. The idea that communication will be required more often, or will be more important, when people have fewer abilities, is absurd. If there is one person who is rooting, one who is mezzing, one who is stunning, etc, there is no need for them to have any kind of dialogue during combat.
It doesn't make a player smarter or better to buff cold resist against the mob that casts ice comet, or to mem root instead of mez against the mob they know is CC immune. Nor is it fun to simply be unlucky because a mob spawned with a disposition that counters your group's load out. You weren't a worse player, you were just unlucky. That is poor design. Dispositions and LAS are an anti-synergy.
What about when things go sideways in combat and you have options to make split second decisions to decide the outcome? That is destroyed with LAS. It is *not* more tactical, it is *not* more challening, it does *not* promote more social interactions and communication.
The arguments are not really abserd mate, just a different opinion. Its all a bit hard honestly to be bothered to reply, but just remember its ok for us to disagree. I know this is going to go round in circles, so i am tentative to reply but I'll just say to the point of socialisation and especially PUG socialisation (which is a huge part of the game to me)...
I'm fairly certain that if you have LAS, groups will need to be more in tune with what each member in their group has loaded up on their LAS bar prior to the fight. And based on needing to be more in tune with each other, they most likely break the ice of conversation over that topic 1st and early on. Breaking the ice can be all A LOT of people need to come out of their shell a little and truly participate in the social part of the game more than they currently do in MMO's. As a very social person, the awkwardness of players in so many MMO's is unbearable at times and it wears on me slowly to gradually myself participate less.
To be clear, I dont want LAS because it breaks the ice, but on this topic of socialisation, i am fairly sure LAS might go a decent way to helping it promote socialisation in general within new groups.
I just dont want to get into a huge back and forward, i'm pretty sure with the current direction of Pantheon, they're not going to get an unlimited skill bar in Pantheon, which is a shame for you guys and lots more i'm sure, but i'll quite happily throw my support behind a LAS, that's just what i prefer. If you end up getting unlimited bar, thats great for you guys!
Who knows how either of our opinions might change in testing, its all good either way... it's Pantheon! Its going to be great regardless of the number of actions skills Krix
Hopefully all those things you mentioned in that mad post about the magic of EQ will be catererd for with careful consideration, then i'll be happy.
I like the LAS and I think 8 combat + 6 utility is excellent.
I enjoy having to make meaningful choices; through my knowledge of my class, my skill in choosing the right abilities in both my prepared selection and my timing/skill to use those in combat.
Or considering the classes that I'm grouped with and how that creates any potential class synergies and how it changes our capabilities or limitations as a group.
For example: Who do we have for CC and what can they do?
Mezz, Stun, Charm, Root and Fear can all be used for CC. But the use of each of these changes the encounter and produces different variables that must be considered.
If the mob can only cast spells then Silence becomes a strong CC.
It's fun to beat an encounter without having everything available, it makes it more difficult and therefore more rewarding. Having everything available would be easier; less satisfying, less challenging, less enjoyable.
It makes no sense for each class to immediately have all their abilities available. Ability preparation is an original core mechanic of DnD also, from which the majority of RPGs are based.
I keep seeing people bringing up Dispositions as an argument for having all their abilities available; they say that they should have everything available so that they can counter any random disposition that may appear.
Again, this makes no sense. What's the point of giving mobs different dispositions and then just giving all players the abilities to counter them and having them always immediately available?
That's like the game just flashing up on screen and saying 'push X now!', 'push B now!', 'run to the monster's tail now'.
Keno Monster said:Hokanu said:LAS bar with the added Buff bar is basically what people seemed ot be getting behind in a thread on here a while back, I think it is a decision they have made after listening to the community. Thanks for listening VR, i think it looks good and makes sense.
Isnt all your abilities at all times just another way to make the game easier.. why do we want that? Convenience? hmm
It should be limited, being limited is part of how you define your playstyle and differ from others, its also how you have a group leader preping the party for the next encounter which I am almost 100% sure is a big reason they want to do it. To bring people together a little more, to make us consider each others playstyle, and setup and work with each other to plug all holes..
ie:
Wizard: Hey Bob the Druid, you're struggling with heals a little so if you want, drop your root spell out for another HoT and I'll take over root duties.
Druid: Actually what we need is a better stun i think, the dps is coming from that spell caster mob, stun him then i've got this, plus my other HoT is crap.
Paladin: ok i can load up a stun, but we'll be losing my DD
Wizard: All good, our DPS is good enough atm *wink* - Loads up ice comet, but we might need some extra taunting haha...
Druid: Nice, lets do that, we'll have a look at the skills again then!
This game is not just about what YOU can do, and how many skills YOU can load up for EVERY occasion, it is about being a team and having these conversations to organise your group to progress to the best of your groups class makeup.
This is yet another argument for LAS that actually details exactly what is wrong with it, layered on top of logical fallacies. Nothing you detailed requires the LAS. For every scenario you can make up where it promotes communication, I can make one up where it doesn't or where having no LAS or a less severe one promotes it even further.
Additionally, if you consider having an LAS to be more "challenging" think about how it restricts what VR is able to do with encounter design. Instead of making encounters themselves more sophisticated, more difficult, they instead place an arbitrary limit on what players are able to do. This is difficulty achieved through constraint, instead of through design. Wouldn't you rather face a more dynamic combat encounter, one where you were allowed to make meaningful decisions on the fly, instead of "preparing" for a much more limited encounter, one you are only preparing for because you already know exactly what's going to happen. That's not challenge. The argument that fewer options makes decisions more difficult or more meaningful is absurd. The idea that communication will be required more often, or will be more important, when people have fewer abilities, is absurd. If there is one person who is rooting, one who is mezzing, one who is stunning, etc, there is no need for them to have any kind of dialogue during combat.
It doesn't make a player smarter or better to buff cold resist against the mob that casts ice comet, or to mem root instead of mez against the mob they know is CC immune. Nor is it fun to simply be unlucky because a mob spawned with a disposition that counters your group's load out. You weren't a worse player, you were just unlucky. That is poor design. Dispositions and LAS are an anti-synergy.
What about when things go sideways in combat and you have options to make split second decisions to decide the outcome? That is destroyed with LAS. It is *not* more tactical, it is *not* more challening, it does *not* promote more social interactions and communication.
And for every situation you can come up with that you think makes LAS worse in my mind it can make it better. This is one of the arguments that there is no overwhelming correct answer just preferred correct answer. In my eyes(getting older), I prefer LAS for even though I have a fairly high APM I prefer seeing the game rather than the UI, I akin it to Seeing the woods for the trees. When I spend more time playing whack a mole(where did I put that ability) than seeing the gameplay I feel fatigued.
Then again I most likely come from a different era where some of my most memorable competitive events I lost rather than won for I learned from those losses and improved and I do not think ever situation should be winnable or trophied.
Today's MMO's are about speed runs, rinse repeat. In those, I do see being able to bring all abilities given with you for those o **** moments. Then again you have a play still that can be pinpointed as the peak way to play. With lots of learned abilities but an LAS you may have a way that seems the best way but a group comes in and does things totally different and wins in glorious fashion. MMOs today with there this is the dance steps it takes to beat this encounter now do them at max efficiency breed toxicity in the community. To be the best you need to be the quickest twitch clicker out there not necessarily the smartest.
Someone mentioned LAS making it feel like a card strategy game. Well, that is not the worst thing in the world if they want to make it more strategic. Magic the gathering is by MIT and other high education institutes consider the hardest most strategic game in the world to master and has what would be akin to a spellbook but LAS. The be Magic players in the world all say the hardest part to master is the sideboard. If you are unfamiliar with Magic and the sideboard. It is a group of cards usually 15 extra cards not in your deck that you can switch into your deck between games. It allows you to adjust your deck to the best way of beating your opponent's specific deck and takes great knowledge of all cards and strategies of which to sub out.
Now I do see some tweaking or actually more learning exactly how much the disposition is going to play into Pantheon to how it affects mobs. It could play some havoc into group strategies and the LAS. Then again maybe it will only affect the behavior(which I believe it does) not the actual combat of the mobs. Just not enough info out there on the disposition system to really tell how much it will affect things.
@oneADseven your first point I actually see as very wrong. LAS does make for more diversity in groups and more dependency on groups. LAS allows for more freedom in the group makeup and less this is the optimal group. Just one big point is it allows for more community groups. You have 2 friends playing shamans and they are both on, cool bring them both they can load up different LAS load outs and seem like a totally different class but makes them communicate on those load-outs. Instead of one feeling like they are just a worse version of the other.
Ezrael said:
That's like the game just flashing up on screen and saying 'push X now!', 'push B now!', 'run to the monster's tail now'.
Thank you that is my biggest pet peeve of games and raids now. It is just how well you do the dance not how well you fight the MOB. Who can twitch the fastest?
The important thing to remember is that the LAS also extends to NPC's and encounter design. Imagine the following scenarios and think about which activity would be more challenging, or require more communication / teamwork:
Scenario #1) Your group of artists travels the world and occasionally find pages of the mythical coloring book. Your group is allowed to observe the page from afar and have to plan on how they can reproduce the already finished piece of work. Due to the LAS, each player has a limited amount of responsibilities/tools that they can utilize to recreate this piece of work. There are 7 different colored pencils available and each player must pick one that they are responsible for. The 7'th color is a wild card and players must figure out the best way to use it, collectively. The players then receive a picture that was similar to that of the mythical coloring book, but minus any coloration. They must then work together to fill that page up with color.
Scenario #2) Your group of artists travels the world and occasionally find pages of the mythical art book. Your group is allowed to observe the page from afar and have to plan on how they can reproduce the already finished piece of work. Since there is no LAS, the spectrum of responsibilities/tools they can utilize is broadened, but they are still required to recreate this piece of work. There are no limits to what players can use to reproduce the artwork but the scope of the project has been increased by a wide margin. Rather than being limited to filling in colors, they must first draw the piece by hand. They are responsible for mixing in paint, colored pencils, crayons, markers, and using a variety of other tools to assist with blending and shading. The wild card here is that players must improve upon the original design and are given creative liberty in how they go about doing it. They are free to use their imagination and the sky is the limit.
I try to imagine a scenario where my real-life would be more challenging if I was only responsible for 8 "abilities" at any given point in time. I think it would be pretty relaxing overall if I could break my life down into 5-6 core responsibilities that fulfill my assigned role overall, and to then flex in a couple of extra abilities "just in case." There would certainly be times where my 8 abilities would not be ideal for a given situation ... and rather than being able to adjust, dynamically, I would be stuck trying to force a square peg through a round hole. It would certainly feel frustrating at times but it wouldn't be long before I mastered my mental box of 8 active abilities and learned how to leverage them for maximum effect, depending on the situation. It would be a process of trial and error with a very limited ceiling. There would be times where I would grow frustrated since I was aware of a solution to a given problem, but failed to plan for it in advance. If life was strictly a game of planning ahead, and balanced around the idea that I'm only responsible for 8 abilities at any given point in time, it would feel less alive, less sporadic, less "real-time." Life would be really bland if it was designed to challenge a small portion of my overall abilities at any given point in time, where planning and locking in which abilities to use before tackling a given problem is more important than how I leverage my overall knowledge, experience, and creativity in the actual act of problem-solving.
In the end, this seems to come down to socialization vs challenging combat. Both are pillars of this game. The question is which one is more important for the longevity and replayability of the game, particularly when it comes to combat. There are plenty of ways to encourage socialization, communication, strategy, and planning ... without an LAS. There are only so many ways to achieve the style of combat that has been advertised, one that is highly engaging, intensely tactical, and action-packed with responsibilities. Removing the ability for players to see the name, level, and class of others would also increase socialization. Rather than being able to see this information with our eyes, we would be forced to request it personally. Removing buff icons would increase socialization. Rather than being able to use our eyes and look at which buffs we have active on our character, we would have to message each player in our group and confirm (and reconfirm many many times in the future) whether or not they applied their buffs to us. Socialization = Planning in this context. That can be achieved without an LAS, arguably more so, due to the fact that content can be balanced around your extended scope of responsibilities and available actions. Challenge = execution, in this context. This can only be watered down by an LAS due to the nature of having a limited scope of responsibilities, and content being balanced around that realization.
Richard Bartle concluded that there are 4 major player types. I sincerely hope to see the world constructed in such a way that all 4 of these player types have plenty of content to enjoy. There has always been an emphasis on both challenge and socialization but it seems like a mistake (IMO) to prioritize socialization over challenge when it comes to combat ... just like it would be a mistake to emphasize challenge over socialization when it comes to identifying player names, levels, classes, and what buffs we have active.
Paloo said:@oneADseven your first point I actually see as very wrong. LAS does make for more diversity in groups and more dependency on groups. LAS allows for more freedom in the group makeup and less this is the optimal group. Just one big point is it allows for more community groups. You have 2 friends playing shamans and they are both on, cool bring them both they can load up different LAS load outs and seem like a totally different class but makes them communicate on those load-outs. Instead of one feeling like they are just a worse version of the other.
You are only reinforcing my point here. If two shamans can feel like "totally different classes" due to their loadouts, the tenet that speaks to class identity isn't being fully realized. The LAS does not allow for "more freedom" in the group. Every class falls under a specific "role umbrella" with some degree of variance when it comes to secondary roles. In order to fulfill that role, players must have role-defining abilities on their bars which runs counter to the freedom that you cherish. Seeing that Pantheon has been dubbed as a group-centric and role-interdependent game, fulfilling these roles should be the rule rather than the exception. As a tank, I understand that my primary roles in a group setting are to manage threat levels, peel allies, and mitigate incoming damage. Preparing abilities that fulfill those roles come first and foremost. If there is any room left at the end, that is where my freedom lies. That sounds very much like an on-rails experience to me.
More and more I read from the anti-LAS crowd the more I feel like it is a bigger issue than just dynamic challenging combat everyone keeps trying to make it into. You can make challenging combat with or without LAS. The line in the sand is one of instant at my hand's info over researching and learning. Today's society has developed into everything that should be at my fingertips when I want/need it should be. That is antiLAS. Having to go learn and maybe experiment and fail all while learning from your mistakes is more the LAS crowd, which is an older mentality. We are the ones that were allowed to touch the hot pot but we learned never to do that again.
Tom Brady is not far from the most athletic QB ever, not were near the top arm strength or speed, can not run very well even for a QB, but is still the greatest of all time. Why he does not carry all the tools everyone else does on to the field. He doesn't always have the greatest teammates. It has never mattered who the teammates are he just wins most of his games. He studies his opponent and himself and can pick their weaknesses apart. He does not do this on the fly he studies film and lots of it before the game. Yes, he makes adjustments but not many he, for the most part, calls a play and beats you with it no need for scrambling.
Paloo said:Ezrael said:
That's like the game just flashing up on screen and saying 'push X now!', 'push B now!', 'run to the monster's tail now'.
Thank you that is my biggest pet peeve of games and raids now. It is just how well you do the dance not how well you fight the MOB. Who can twitch the fastest?
The LAS does not prevent twitch gameplay. Please see the following video as one example of many:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufjsXp38DHI
The argument being made is that by decreasing the depth/breadth of abilities that we have access to at any given point in time, all of the desired pacing/action is being funneled into fewer abilities which feels more spammy. FFXI didn't have an LAS but has a notorious reputation as one of the most slow-paced MMO's ever made. Slow-paced ... but while still having highly engaging and intensely tactical combat. There was still plenty of planning and strategy and once again, FFXI had a notorious reputation for being arguably the most group-centric and role-interdependent MMO ever made.
i'm okay if las8 uas 6 if we get locked into our bars and they can't be easily swapped.
i'm not okay with having to swap spells and abilities encounter to encounter. that is really annoying and they might as well open up the flood gates for action slots.
to be clear i'm not anti las. i'm antiswappingfest. it's not fun. it's tedious. that's like if i had to change shoes for each actiivity i do throughout the day.
wake up? put on slippers.
working out? put on gym shoes.
going to work? put on dress shoes.
going to next job? put on work boots.
going out for lunch? change to walking shoes.
need to use the restroom? wear crocs.
imagine if i had to change my entire attire for each person i ran into. that's what swapping my entire las for each encounter would feel like. ain't nobody got time for that. it's already tedious to find party members that would tolerate my tight gaming schedule.
Paloo said:
Tom Brady is not far from the most athletic QB ever, not were near the top arm strength or speed, can not run very well even for a QB, but is still the greatest of all time. Why he does not carry all the tools everyone else does on to the field. He doesn't always have the greatest teammates. It has never mattered who the teammates are he just wins most of his games. He studies his opponent and himself and can pick their weaknesses apart. He does not do this on the fly he studies film and lots of it before the game. Yes, he makes adjustments but not many he, for the most part, calls a play and beats you with it no need for scrambling.
I love this example. You want to know the difference between Tom Brady and most rookie quarterbacks? Tom Brady is a seasoned veteran who has been working with the same coach and offensive coordinator for many years. He is an expert at his craft and has a really complicated playbook to draw from. He operates as a QB but understands that the path to success is very much a team game and dialing up the right play at the right time has been a major factor in the success of his team. Rookie quarterbacks have their playbook dumbed down ... because they don't have the experience and don't have the mental wherewithal to process so many possible plays as a team. Tom Brady is a master of precision and critical timing. He doesn't need the best arm strength because he trusts his receivers to run their routes perfectly, and they trust him to deliver the ball exactly where it needs to be. He doesn't have to be the most mobile quarterback because he has an uncanny ability to read defenses and feel pressure in real-time and use his mental processing power to exploit the situation and find the open man or seam down the field. Tom Brady is a master of execution. He can be trusted to read a defense and call an audible after the original play call has been communicated. This is exactly the type of dynamic play and emphasis on real-time observation and reaction that has been discussed throughout this thread.
oneADseven said:Paloo said:@oneADseven your first point I actually see as very wrong. LAS does make for more diversity in groups and more dependency on groups. LAS allows for more freedom in the group makeup and less this is the optimal group. Just one big point is it allows for more community groups. You have 2 friends playing shamans and they are both on, cool bring them both they can load up different LAS load outs and seem like a totally different class but makes them communicate on those load-outs. Instead of one feeling like they are just a worse version of the other.You are only reinforcing my point here. If two shamans can feel like "totally different classes" due to their loadouts, the tenet that speaks to class identity isn't being fully realized. The LAS does not allow for "more freedom" in the group. Every class falls under a specific "role umbrella" with some degree of variance when it comes to secondary roles. In order to fulfill that role, players must have role-defining abilities on their bars which runs counter to the freedom that you cherish. Seeing that Pantheon has been dubbed as a group-centric and role-interdependent game, fulfilling these roles should be the rule rather than the exception. As a tank, I understand that my primary roles in a group setting are to manage threat levels, peel allies, and mitigate incoming damage. Preparing abilities that fulfill those roles come first and foremost. If there is any room left at the end, that is where my freedom lies. That sounds very much like an on-rails experience to me.
I reinforced your point of view which at the end of the day is just an opinion just as mine is just that and opinion.
The way you are saying class identity and role, makes it sound like the game should only have one of each class for each role and classes shouldn't be able to bend out of that role. Then again I always play a jack of all trades master of none bard type. I like to fill whatever role my group needs me to fill at that time.
YES, this does lean more towards a community social game but has very little to do with challenging dynamics. I would rather play with friends and have a good time vs getting frustrated cause someone didn't do the right step of the combat dance at the right time. Then again I am one that sees the woods for the trees, in-game terms I play the game for the experience not for carrot it is dangling in front of me. I could careless for achievement the game is going to reward me for not getting standing in the fire.
To get back on to the one topic no one has convinced me that having 50 hotkey abilities makes for more dynamic gameplay. It just makes for more button mashing. The term face rolling came to the genre when LAS systems went out of fashion. Think about that for a second.
Paloo said:YES, this does lean more towards a community social game but has very little to do with challenging dynamics. I would rather play with friends and have a good time vs getting frustrated cause someone didn't do the right step of the combat dance at the right time. Then again I am one that sees the woods for the trees, in-game terms I play the game for the experience not for carrot it is dangling in front of me. I could careless for achievement the game is going to reward me for not getting standing in the fire.
Preparing the right abilities for your hotbar is the same thing as doing "the right step of the dance at the right time" ... the main difference is that this "step" can be done in relative safety and can be explained through a guide. It is far easier to look up a guide and mimic an ideal "hotbar strategy" for a given fight than it is to watch a video and mimic the execution of a highly-skilled player.
Paloo said:To get back on to the one topic no one has convinced me that having 50 hotkey abilities makes for more dynamic gameplay. It just makes for more button mashing. The term face rolling came to the genre when LAS systems went out of fashion. Think about that for a second.
The term "face roll win" is actually more prominent while using LAS restrictions even though it originated in the WoW community. The phrase is often used to describe a type of gameplay where a player relies on a single overpowered ability to provide most of their value. It suggests that you can bind that ability to every key and then simply use your face to achieve success because there is very little tact or strategy required when you spam your auto-win button. Removing the LAS does not contribute to that style of gameplay. The point is that you have a variety of abilities that have situational value which can be partly/mostly realized depending on both your micro/macro scale awareness. This requires execution during active combat and provides a certain degree of challenge regardless of how prepared you are. That degree of challenge increases significantly when you add dynamic variables to combat (which don't mesh very well with an LAS) -- compare this to an LAS-focused system where players can look up the "optimal hotbar" online. Is knowledge truly half the battle, even when that knowledge is blasted all over the internet or used in descriptive click-bait titles on Youtube such as "Absolute Best Rogue Build for Boss X12" -- I'll take the system that requires awareness/skill every day of the week. If my awareness and skill are not being challenged, the game is not fun.
Its great to differentiate in combat skills and utility to 8/6 it will get a more fluid gameplay and you dont need to swap to many grp buffs in and out.
This will benifit some classes more than other of course especally heavy buff classes,some classes that lack a broad spectrum of utility or mostly situational utilitys might have it harder because they lost the previus 12 all around slots.
So great for some classes perhaps not so for other classes ?
To those claiming the LAS makes responding to dynamic content, dispositions, or changing circumstances/encounters better.. That would be true if you had options available. You don't.
The idea that you will "adapt" or "come together" or "work as a team" or "just barely survive" ? It doesn't apply. A disposition that respawns that is immune to mez will simply kill your enchanter and then wipe the group, if you can't switch abilities.
Similarly, a disposition that kills the healer first when you can't switch abilities? wipes the group. a disposition that is immune to taunt when you can't switch abilities? wipes the group. Insert any disposition here that will simply wipe the group if you can't switch abilities to adjust to a dynamic/random respawn/disposition. Even worse with a boss that places you in-combat BEFORE you know it's disposition.
The knife-edge of "win" is so narrow, you can't see it. Losing to RNG, by design, is the most anti-EQ "feature" I've encountered in the intervening 20+ years.
Similarly, again, the in-combat / out-of-combat switching thing.. These classes want to be in-combat as often and as long as possible, and out-of-combat for as little time as possible, because the only time they generate their classes special in-combat resources is when they're in combat: Cleric, Paladin, Warrior, Dire Lord, Ranger, Monk, Shaman(maybe).
These classes want to be out-of-combat exactly long enough to recover mana/whatever:Rogue (maybe), Summoner, Enchanter, Wizard, Druid, Shaman(maybe). Full stop. If you don't let them, they will forever be unhappy. If you force them back into combat, and/or impose additional restrictions without letting them recover out-of-combat, they will not be effective in combat.
Why is this relevant? Because when you can switch LAS bars and get back into combat, and whether or not the entire group is forced back into combat, will determine the emergent gameplay of all players. Those that only gain combat resources will feel the pressure (constantly) of their combat resources dwindling away for every second they're not in combat, with the desire to return to combat immediately. In opposition to that are those classes who want to switch LAS bars and stay out of combat exactly long enough to recover mana/whatever. It is not like EQ1, at all, in this respect. As designed and demonstrated, it's a fundamentally different forced driver for emergent player behavior that is going to cause negative social interactions, within any group.
What we don't know is: What are Joppas launch-day design goals regarding how & when a group enters combat? Is it based on the actions of any player in the group/raid, zone-wide? Or is it based on each individuals actions, always? Is it going to be limited by range, or not? Are there special conditions under which it can be forced, but generally is not?
The answers will determine how much impact this not-like-EQ1 LAS+Combat Resources+Dispositions combat will have, with respect to emergent player behavior.
oneADseven said:Paloo said:
Tom Brady is not far from the most athletic QB ever, not were near the top arm strength or speed, can not run very well even for a QB, but is still the greatest of all time. Why he does not carry all the tools everyone else does on to the field. He doesn't always have the greatest teammates. It has never mattered who the teammates are he just wins most of his games. He studies his opponent and himself and can pick their weaknesses apart. He does not do this on the fly he studies film and lots of it before the game. Yes, he makes adjustments but not many he, for the most part, calls a play and beats you with it no need for scrambling.
He can be trusted to read a defense and call an audible after the original play call has been communicated. This is exactly the type of dynamic play and emphasis on real-time observation and reaction that has been discussed throughout this thread.
Thank you he calls that audible before the play starts in other words before combat starts. He actually is not a very good QB under pressure he doesn't do as well. He was 24th in the league this under pressure. The 2018 season he was 24th best starting QB under pressure. In 2017 he was the worst QB vs the blitz he does not change on the fly very well. So in Pantheon Brady would look at the mobs he was fixing to fight to go into his spellbook and change his LAS. He would not start combat and change strategies midway through the battle. Your way of thinking on Tom would be correct if we could only change our LAS in town. WE will carry our spellbooks with us and constantly be changing them according to what we are observing between fights instead of being a scrambler trying to find that damn spell on my screen of hot bars. I do not want a second screen just to see the combat being played.
That is what LAS strategy is, it gives me a playbook of plays for different things that might be thrown at me but make me choose the play, out of it beforehand. It makes it more team-oriented play.
PS: thanks for the good debate. I do like chatting about it with you and learning different view points.
Paloo said:
Thank you he calls that audible before the play starts in other words before combat starts. He actually is not a very good QB under pressure he doesn't do as well. He was 24th in the league this under pressure. The 2018 season he was 24th best starting QB under pressure. In 2017 he was the worst QB vs the blitz he does not change on the fly very well. So in Pantheon Brady would look at the mobs he was fixing to fight to go into his spellbook and change his LAS. He would not start combat and change strategies midway through the battle. Your way of thinking on Tom would be correct if we could only change our LAS in town. WE will carry our spellbooks with us and constantly be changing them according to what we are observing between fights instead of being a scrambler trying to find that damn spell on my screen of hot bars. I do not want a second screen just to see the combat being played.
That is what LAS strategy is, it gives me a playbook of plays for different things that might be thrown at me but make me choose the play, out of it beforehand. It makes it more team-oriented play.
PS: thanks for the good debate. I do like chatting about it with you and learning different view points.
Tom Brady is a dinosaur playing without good receivers. It's easy to find statistical anomalies from this past season that paint a certain picture about his ability, but the previous point remains. While it is true that an audible is called before the ball is hiked, the act of calling an audible is still more of a "reactionary" thing than "planning ahead" thing. The QB assesses the defense and considers the viability of the planned play call. More importantly, his ability to read a defense and find the open man is 100% based on reactionary play. There are plenty of rookie QB's who make up their mind on who they are going to throw the ball to before the play starts. It's a common rookie mistake. They stare down the intended receiver and try to fit the ball into an extremely tight window, often missing the open receiver because of their inability to scan the field and assess what's going on in a matter of seconds. Getting a feel for where the pressure is coming from, who drops into zone coverage, who is man-to-man ... all of these things happen after the play starts. The best QB's take advantage of all these things in real-time. Most rookie QB's are reliant on a much smaller playbook and simple decision making processes. Progressing through reads in real-time is the type of reactive-after-the-play-starts type of gameplay that I want to see emphasized ... and a hard-locked LAS really gets in the way of that.
Cheers man, always happy to have a good debate and I appreciate your willingness to engage with me on this topic!