Crowd control should not be based on RNG

We have not received permission from truelyyy to share the quoted post.

In the end we're having the same philosophical discussion across multiple threads and concepts.

Some subset of people perceive lack of RNG as lack of any driving force for timing, decision making, or interaction between the ways players make moment-to-moment choices.

A different set of people going 'wait no, that's not how that works, the determining factor is decision making'.

If one wants to argue 'player's ability to rapidly make decisions and notice situations should not be the important factor in RPGs', that's different. 'Rotations' and 'optimized meta builds' are not innate to mostly-deterministic gameplay, that happens when the gameplay isn't built around moment-to-moment decision making options to begin with.

And why do we not build games like that normally? Because RNG.

We have not received permission from Noaani to share the quoted post.

The game with the 8.5 review on polygon no poor reviews on the side bar for google search 71 % positive reviews on Steam and at least 60 different combat styles if you count the sword play.

But sure it's shit because you say so.

JustVine wrote: »

We have not received permission from Noaani to share the quoted post.

The game with the 8.5 review on polygon no poor reviews on the side bar for google search 71 % positive reviews on Steam and at least 60 different combat styles if you count the sword play.

But sure it's shit because you say so.

I believe Noaani's argument is that the game is bad because not enough people reviewed it. It doesn't matter what the people who like the game think, if... something.

I can now say with clarity though, without feeling like I'm just attacking due to bias.

Noaani thinks Absolver is bad because Noaani is bad at Absolver, or bad at understanding Absolver. Not sure which, and it probably doesn't matter. The game admittedly does not do a good job of explaining itself to a person who doesn't play fighting games at the 'higher than mashing' skill tier.

But the specific complaints and 'points made' indicate this pretty clearly.

Idk, just in case anyone outside my group puts any weight on things I say, there you have it. When you don't know how to play fighters, you conclude that the games are about 'spamming' and 'repeating things', particularly when the game is trying to 'make it so you don't get immediately destroyed due to your lack of understanding'.

The game makes it possible to win by 'repeating rotations' because otherwise even less people would play it. Ashes doesn't have this problem because it isn't a fighting game, and adding a few more decision elements and removing RNG on certain things will not make it one.

Also Noaani is wrong about how exactly 'builds' work in fighting games too, because every character is a 'build', most games have between 16 and 40 of them, and the ones with 16 usually have literally 'choices you can make about which skills you have to use', sometimes more than 3.

Older Soul Calibur even has entire modes where you can use different weapons, and New Soul Calibur have entire 'build your own character from a base' modes. The reason those characters get outlawed in tournament play is exactly the reason they would be allowed and encouraged in games like Ashes. To make it easier to rapidly figure out how to fight them without randomly losing to the strengths build you don't understand.

Honestly I'm surprised this is even still being presented as a point given how many obvious holes there are in the stance. Are people seriously expected to just believe 'no, there are no examples, it's the fighting gamers who are wrong!'?

We have not received permission from CROW3 to share the quoted post.

Oh, that link wasn't to the Stun topic, I just didn't feel like reproducing the example from the Melee Feedback topic so I linked it instead.

If the game makes it possible for you to literally 'see the attack coming' and then to 'dodge the attack', the abstraction isn't required. All it does is then make it possible for a player to 'execute their attack perfectly and then miss the attack'.

But this thread is about CCs and I'm not really invested in whether or not Evasion chance vs Accuracy on other strikes is a thing here. If a CC is a skillshot, and the person using it does it correctly and then it fails because the other person put on a gear piece with a 5% resistance to that CC, then meta builds and balance issues are going to pop up way faster than if they put on a 5% CC reduction gear piece.

And again, we know this, because BDO.

We have not received permission from Noaani to share the quoted post.

Did you know that the Windfall style in Absolver allows you to dodge literally every single attack that comes at you if you can see it coming (or guess right for the faster ones.) Where are your rotations now?

JustVine wrote: »

We have not received permission from Noaani to share the quoted post.

Did you know that the Windfall style in Absolver allows you to dodge literally every single attack that comes at you if you can see it coming (or guess right for the faster ones.) Where are your rotations now?

Noaani is just being a pointless derail.



For anyone else who cares, find the 'rotation' and the 'RNG' and that's where you have effectively gained the ability to see whatever Noaani is seeing. If you don't find it, well...

If character skills can meaningfully trump player skills, the game should be Tab Target. And I'll be happy to play that too, because boy do I love massive Accuracy Down on enemies while building for evasion.

Satisfying. For me of course.

We have not received permission from Noaani to share the quoted post.

The reasons you have given are all centered on the popularity of the game, and not any actual discussion beyond 'it is shit' without giving reasons why. If this is how you implement mechanics in a game, then maybe Ashes should have battle passes and randomized instanced matchmaking - Fortnite does that, and it has the most reviews of anything out there.

Maybe try to engage on why they are bad design decisions instead of making it a popularity contest. Adding a feature to your game only if it passes a threshold of popularity is a great way to make something bland and boring.