Will we see these fan favorites in Pantheon?
I rly thought that monk in Eq was cool due to the constant flow of attacks.
Every time my warrior attacked 2 times, this monk would have attacked 6x times. He’s attack was not the highest dps, but man he did many of them!
I also like having a 2 hander and be able to land 2x big hits at once, while my weapon was on cd i would cast a stun,
damage spell or heal. After the cast animation my 2 hander would go off again, it felt very strong but it took some practice to do efficiently :)
If we see double attack and triple attacks in Pantheon, witch classes should have these?
In EQ Monks got triple attacks from AA points.
Not sure what rogue got, was it double backstab?
Not sure what the Beast master had either.
Warrior, paladin and Shd. knight was limited to double attack if i recall correct.
Should all melee classes be able to do triple attacks at some point, or do you prefer some classes "only" get double attacks? So the classes with triple attack can feel more special.
Agreed - if the bulk of damage comes from autoattack damage (like EQ), then things like double-attack, triple-attack, parry, riposte, and so on are ways to set martial classes apart from others that might use the same weapons.
That said, I think it should tie into your skill level with a weapon too. If a warrior picks up a spear and he has no experience using that spear, then he shouldn't be double-attacking with it until he's gotten that skill up a bit.
I played EQ Monk for 13 years and I gave up the DPS chase since highest damage came from best equiped when all skills were maxed. I think the options for double and triple attack should be open to all melee classes but with balance to defense. A heavy armor class should never get as many attacks as a lighter armored class unless using more resources, ie stamina, abilities, spell effect.
Ideally, I would like to see attackspeed scaling with something like agility/dexterity, as well as implicit on different weapon types. A 2 handed mace being significantly slower than a dagger for example. Which then naturally would mean that a Monk fighting unarmed/knuckles, would attack and feel a lot faster than a 2h wielding Warrior. A class shouldn't only feel different in the player's hand, but also to the world around you.
It only makes sense if Pantheon's combat is heavily auto attack based. Hopefully it won't be, so something like this may or may not make sense. Only testing will reveal whether or not something like this should exist.
Liav said:It only makes sense if Pantheon's combat is heavily auto attack based. Hopefully it won't be, so something like this may or may not make sense. Only testing will reveal whether or not something like this should exist.
I'm curious, Liav. What is your beef with combat being heavily determined by auto-attack? What is your preferred alternative, and why? That's a genuine question.
Tralyan said:Liav said:It only makes sense if Pantheon's combat is heavily auto attack based. Hopefully it won't be, so something like this may or may not make sense. Only testing will reveal whether or not something like this should exist.
I'm curious, Liav. What is your beef with combat being heavily determined by auto-attack? What is your preferred alternative, and why? That's a genuine question.
I'd like to know what else it could be? It's either tab targetted auto-attack based or its action based, which they said is not the way its going to be.
As MMORPGs go, I can't think of another system other than those two.
I like games that emphasize mechanical skill. World of Warcraft, EQ2, etc. all emphasize mechanical skill a lot more than a game like EQ ever did. This is coming from someone who has played EQ since 2001 and still plays it to this day.
Whether or not combat has tab-targetting has nothing to do with auto attack. I want players to be more involved in playing their characters. Vanguard has an example of this. Auto attack existed, but it was an extremely small amount of your total outgoing damage. Almost all of the effectiveness of your class came from intelligent ability usage. EQ2 is similar. While auto attack played a larger role in EQ2 than in Vanguard, the best players could easily be seen by the way they manage their abilities as efficiently as possible.
In short, if you want to play well, you should have to press buttons and you should have to do it as optimally as possible. Standing behind a mob while the game automatically does 95% of your damage for you is not my idea of good gameplay. The more technical the combat is, the better.
I'm more than OK with performance being more tied to how well you know which buttons to push when, as long it doesn't become a twitch fest, which the devs said it wouldn't. There is, to me, a difference between being able to string together the right set of abilities to gain the most benefit in a given situation, and needing to mash buttons at a carpel tunnel inducing pace.
Wandidar said:I'm more than OK with performance being more tied to how well you know which buttons to push when, as long it doesn't become a twitch fest, which the devs said it wouldn't. There is, to me, a difference between being able to string together the right set of abilities to gain the most benefit in a given situation, and needing to mash buttons at a carpel tunnel inducing pace.
I concur. I don't want to see rapid fire button mashing, either.
Liav said:I like games that emphasize mechanical skill. World of Warcraft, EQ2, etc. all emphasize mechanical skill a lot more than a game like EQ ever did. This is coming from someone who has played EQ since 2001 and still plays it to this day.
Whether or not combat has tab-targetting has nothing to do with auto attack. I want players to be more involved in playing their characters. Vanguard has an example of this. Auto attack existed, but it was an extremely small amount of your total outgoing damage. Almost all of the effectiveness of your class came from intelligent ability usage. EQ2 is similar. While auto attack played a larger role in EQ2 than in Vanguard, the best players could easily be seen by the way they manage their abilities as efficiently as possible.
In short, if you want to play well, you should have to press buttons and you should have to do it as optimally as possible. Standing behind a mob while the game automatically does 95% of your damage for you is not my idea of good gameplay. The more technical the combat is, the better.
I understand where you're coming from with this, but I think many games have taken it to an extreme. I don't want to be running around with four or five hotbars up at max level, nor do I want to be involved in conversations with other players about what "rotations" get the best DPS. All that does is lead to playing-by-rote. When you get into a fight where something happens to interrupt that rote flow, you then see who really has skill and who doesn't. The skilled people recover and adapt.
To me real skill is a combination of things.
- Controlling your character's movement/positioning relative to the encounter
- Using the right abilities at the right times
- Being equipped and prepared for encounters, not just relying on brute force.
- Being able to adapt to unique/challenging environments and conditions that change during encounters.
Even EverQuest can make use of far more than 5 hotbars.
Rotations hopefully won't exist because Pantheon won't have a global cooldown as far as I know.
I definitely don't advocate for extremes, ever. I agree with all of your points, I just don't want combat distilled down to 90% auto attack.
I'm also hopeful that most of your abilities won't be "best in most cases" - I would love a restricted spell bar (which they have said might be a thing) with a good set of abilities to choose from that you have to think about before entering a dungeon or whatever.... so a thought process like "Hmmm... lots of poison mobs in this dungeon, these abilities will work best"
On top of that, I would LOVE some abilities that can be used in different ways for different purposes. The example for this I typically use is that I used to pull with my agro-reducing spell. It wasn't the intended purpose of the spell (clearly) but it got me on the mobs agro table, and it allowed the tank to grab agro very easily - as opposed to some rangers who would pepper mobs with 4000 arrows and then wonder why they'd get the daylights beat out of them when they got back to group.
Liav said:I like games that emphasize mechanical skill. World of Warcraft, EQ2, etc. all emphasize mechanical skill a lot more than a game like EQ ever did. This is coming from someone who has played EQ since 2001 and still plays it to this day.
Whether or not combat has tab-targetting has nothing to do with auto attack. I want players to be more involved in playing their characters. Vanguard has an example of this. Auto attack existed, but it was an extremely small amount of your total outgoing damage. Almost all of the effectiveness of your class came from intelligent ability usage. EQ2 is similar. While auto attack played a larger role in EQ2 than in Vanguard, the best players could easily be seen by the way they manage their abilities as efficiently as possible.
In short, if you want to play well, you should have to press buttons and you should have to do it as optimally as possible. Standing behind a mob while the game automatically does 95% of your damage for you is not my idea of good gameplay. The more technical the combat is, the better.
Gotcha, and agreed, although personally I would enjoy a 50/50 role in mechanical vs auto-attack for the reasons listed above.
Vanguard did a good job with skills, and the ability to create macros that activated a multitude of skills at once that didn't share global cooldowns was a great idea. The chained attacks, as well, made it less about just a rotation and forced you to pay more attention to combat. Hopefully Pantheon follows something along these lines.
Liav said:Even EverQuest can make use of far more than 5 hotbars.
Rotations hopefully won't exist because Pantheon won't have a global cooldown as far as I know.
I definitely don't advocate for extremes, ever. I agree with all of your points, I just don't want combat distilled down to 90% auto attack.
I think there's a global cooldown, in the last monk stream, whenever Cohh used attack all the other buttons were greyed out and returned to normal colour 0.5 secs later. But I don't see how global cooldowns lead to rotations? I don't believe there will be rotations in Pantheon, from what I've seen melee classes use stamina as the main resource for using attacks , (guesstimating here) I think melee dmg will be a constant minigame of balancing your stamina bar, where you'll have periods of high activity burst dmg, and period of lower activity to build your stamina back up so you can burst again when needed, or you can choose to keep a steady pace until the stamina runs out. Not enterely sure of what I'm saying here because on the December 2016 stream the rogue stamina bar seemed to regenerate very slowly but the attacks didn't consume much stamina, but in the newer streams (April 2017 and the Twichcon stream) the Warrior and Monk stamina bar was regening really fast but the attack consumed large chunks of stamina, so the gameplay I described might apply only to the rogue or it might not even exist now that stamina regeneration and consumption was changed.
Also if there's no gobal cooldown then you can use all you skills at the same time, that doesn't make much sense, using 5+ damaging skills in the same moment to burst is not and ideal game mechanic and it would make attack animations quite awkward.
jpedrote said:Not enterely sure of what I'm saying here because on the December 2016 stream the rogue stamina bar seemed to regenerate very slowly but the attacks didn't consume much stamina, but in the newer streams (April 2017 and the Twichcon stream) the Warrior and Monk stamina bar was regening really fast but the attack consumed large chunks of stamina, so the gameplay I described might apply only to the rogue or it might not even exist now that stamina regeneration and consumption was changed.
Also if there's no gobal cooldown then you can use all you skills at the same time, that doesn't make much sense, using 5+ damaging skills in the same moment to burst is not and ideal game mechanic and it would make attack animations quite awkward.
Pretty sure in December the rogue's energy regen was slower due to him using CC, no? One of the trade offs of using/maintaining CC with rogue was reduced dps capacity if I remember right. That said, I am all for energy as fairly fast regenerating resource that needs to be used wisely. Sometimes you go for the heavy hit ability but then find you don't have the resources to pop off that interrupt. Whoops!
jpedrote said:I think there's a global cooldown, in the last monk stream, whenever Cohh used attack all the other buttons were greyed out and returned to normal colour 0.5 secs later. But I don't see how global cooldowns lead to rotations? I don't believe there will be rotations in Pantheon, from what I've seen melee classes use stamina as the main resource for using attacks , (guesstimating here) I think melee dmg will be a constant minigame of balancing your stamina bar, where you'll have periods of high activity burst dmg, and period of lower activity to build your stamina back up so you can burst again when needed, or you can choose to keep a steady pace until the stamina runs out. Not enterely sure of what I'm saying here because on the December 2016 stream the rogue stamina bar seemed to regenerate very slowly but the attacks didn't consume much stamina, but in the newer streams (April 2017 and the Twichcon stream) the Warrior and Monk stamina bar was regening really fast but the attack consumed large chunks of stamina, so the gameplay I described might apply only to the rogue or it might not even exist now that stamina regeneration and consumption was changed.
Also if there's no gobal cooldown then you can use all you skills at the same time, that doesn't make much sense, using 5+ damaging skills in the same moment to burst is not and ideal game mechanic and it would make attack animations quite awkward.
You're right, actually. Vanguard had GCD and rotations weren't a thing. Part of that was because of chain abilities and reactions though.
In a game like World of Warcraft, RIFT, etc. you generally have macros with a ton of things stuck together so you do a very simple 1-1-1-2-3 type of rotation without many hiccups.
I prefer having all of my cooldowns independent of eachother, like EQ or EQ2.
Iksar said:Pretty sure in December the rogue's energy regen was slower due to him using CC, no? One of the trade offs of using/maintaining CC with rogue was reduced dps capacity if I remember right. That said, I am all for energy as fairly fast regenerating resource that needs to be used wisely. Sometimes you go for the heavy hit ability but then find you don't have the resources to pop off that interrupt. Whoops!
No he wasn't doing any CC, if you look at the big stone boss fight in amberfaet his attacks take around 5-10% of the yellow bar and it regens slowly, in the latest streams attacks take around 30-60% and it regens in about 1-2 seconds, I'm fine with either system aslong as it's fun and engaging, but I would preffer a slower pace with more emphasis on the management of endurance. That interaction with interrupt could also be achived with a slower regen system, they would just need to make a restriction on the interrupt ability so it's only usable if you have +50% of your total endurance, but ye either way I hope they make it fun :)
Liav said:You're right, actually. Vanguard had GCD and rotations weren't a thing. Part of that was because of chain abilities and reactions though.
In a game like World of Warcraft, RIFT, etc. you generally have macros with a ton of things stuck together so you do a very simple 1-1-1-2-3 type of rotation without many hiccups.
I prefer having all of my cooldowns independent of eachother, like EQ or EQ2.
In the monk stream there was some interaction showed between different skills kind of "riding" of eachother so I think they're going for something similar to VG
Well currently in WoW it's a priority list more than anything where you use the skills that's at the top of the list and then the next one and so on, but macroing multiple skills to one button press won't be allow so I don't think it will be a problem
Liav said:It only makes sense if Pantheon's combat is heavily auto attack based. Hopefully it won't be, so something like this may or may not make sense. Only testing will reveal whether or not something like this should exist.
Honestly, with us only having one hotbar its probably going to be a 50/50 thing, which im actually cool with, becuase you get best of both worlds, terrible players will still do some damage and not completely useless but still makes it to where the good players see a huge difference in damage. Plus even with the abilities in WoW the biggiest chunk f damage came from auto attacking compared to indiivual abities, grant the lump some of abilities def did way for damage but if you look at the % of what did the most damage seperating the abilities and auto attacks auto attacks usually won.
Liav said:I like games that emphasize mechanical skill. World of Warcraft, EQ2, etc. all emphasize mechanical skill a lot more than a game like EQ ever did. This is coming from someone who has played EQ since 2001 and still plays it to this day.
Whether or not combat has tab-targetting has nothing to do with auto attack. I want players to be more involved in playing their characters. Vanguard has an example of this. Auto attack existed, but it was an extremely small amount of your total outgoing damage. Almost all of the effectiveness of your class came from intelligent ability usage. EQ2 is similar. While auto attack played a larger role in EQ2 than in Vanguard, the best players could easily be seen by the way they manage their abilities as efficiently as possible.
In short, if you want to play well, you should have to press buttons and you should have to do it as optimally as possible. Standing behind a mob while the game automatically does 95% of your damage for you is not my idea of good gameplay. The more technical the combat is, the better.
This is why many of us play casters. There is a skill set for a chanter to lock down 5 mobs and directing the group which on to kill in what order. Or a wizard, before agro monitors, who is walking that fine line between over nuking and getting summoned and killed, and laying down massive damage to the raid mobs. I loved that about the wizrd class....you had to develop a feel for the class and know when to be cautious. Also, a great wizard could fill in as crowd controler in most group situations (I rooted add, back away.) My first class was a warrior in EQ1. I got bored with auto attack, kick, taunt route...and went caster and never looked back. On the other hand I am not a fan of EQ2 tanking where you just watch your full bar of effects refresh and button smash. Hopefully panteon has a balance to make melee exciting , but not a non stop button mashing class. I would just look at the button the whole battle. Not fun. Or the fact that in EQ2 I could easily solo 6 mobs at a time. That is a joke. In EQ1 tanks were terrible at solo......we need a balance between the extremes.