We have not received permission from Mag7spy to share the quoted post.
If you have changed your stance from what you have said in the past, then I apologize.
I don't want to have the discussion about the whole 'don't add more Action because it lowers tactics' thing. As long as we can all agree that it's a SLIDER for skill and which type of skill, then I have no argument. Noaani wishes 'less action so that there can be more thinking skills'.
I will repeat that I don't agree with Noaani on this entirely because I also like the physical skills and IF they make PvE enemies with the correct types of physical skill challenges, I will consider it to be just as fun and tactical as a fully Tab Target encounter.
I am not arguing with you
if you are not saying that Tab requires less skill OR if you are saying 'Skill in Tab could be replaced by adding a skill type that I like better'. I also believe that some 'skill in Tab can be replaced by adding a skill type that I like better'.
It's called ArcheAge.
Actually I think you might just have got tangled up in the argument again, so let's untangle.
1. I know AoC will combine Action and Tab.
2. I know that they will probably make Action much easier than actually difficult Action Games, and that it will therefore be less 'far' from Tab Target than those games (Absolver)
3. I believe that Noaani has correctly argued in the past that you would have to replace some of the Tactical Thinking difficulty if you wanted to have more Action Difficulty in
A Raid Setting
.
Neither you nor I would like for that to happen, and the 'cost' will be less
TACTICALLY
complex raids, with additional complexity based on physical skills of a decent level (below what NiKr would want, for example).
I was saying the same thing as you. Developers will only add the easier or 'fake' parts of 'Action Combat' if they want to keep complex battles, and this will be good because it will mean that Tab Target players will be effective too.
@NiKr
, this is the reason I have the concern about the Fighter speed. That dash is not 'fake'. If you are 'required to use that' at a skill level anywhere near Absolver/Melty/Genshin, it will be rough for a lot of people. Imagine a scenario like this:
"Boss winds up for an attack with 20f startup that causes an AoE smash knockdown around them, but either recovers or does a second 40f explosion attack almost immediately if the boss is hit by any melee attack during that time."
The Fighter must see this attack start, react by backdashing out of the way to avoid being knocked down, and then IF the Fighter is confident that no one else hit it with a Melee attack 'during the animation' as a 'trade' (for example a Tank might be able to resist the knockdown), to optimize their DPS they should dash again immediately back into the enemy and attack.
Because it's a free window for using a bigger damage attack than the Fighter can normally get. Let's say the Boss goes into a blocking stance or a counter-block stance for a moment, about 30f after that AoE knockdown.
So the Fighter player must 'see and react to the AoE', 'react to whether or not they think any Melee Allies did NOT react to the AoE (and stop their own attack to prevent the explosion part), instantly dash back in if they did not, and activate a move with exactly enough startup to hit before the Counter-Block state.
In the game type I am used to, the boss would be able to do this AoE attack back to back. If the Fighter's best option for hitting in the gap is on cooldown, they must now decide which option is best. The previous two decisions also change.
In a 'truly challenging raid' of the level I am used to, this would NOT be optional. Similar to the Lost Ark thing. Either you can execute this, or you will lose the raid (let's assume that the Counter from the Counter-Block stance hits VERY hard).
If you react to the Knockdown 3-4 frames late, you fall.
If you react to 'someone hitting the boss during the knockdown' 3-4 frames late, you get hit by the explosion while in an offensive/recovery state.
If you react too late to 'no one actually hit the boss' and dash in and attack, and CounterStance is up, you DIE outright.
If you choose an alternative move that has too slow a startup because you are under an 'attack speed' debuff' from one of the boss' other previous abilities, and Counterstance is up, you DIE outright.
If you lost track of 'the attack speed buff your Bard was giving and it wears off and you choose a move that only works if you have that buff, you hit Counterstance, you DIE outright'.
If you don't turn correctly in time because the boss' AoE knockdown is actually a short charge with a pushback and you were slightly off position (because a Fighter should be at the side of this boss to prevent being caught in the longer 'forward line' of the attack) and you end up having to spend 2 more frames turning to make sure your ability hits properly... oops, Counterstance. you DIE outright.
The above is a description of Monster Hunter (no specific monster that I can think of, it's just a similar feeling).
Whew... ok, so now to put that back in perspective of the question...
"By making the Fighter's Dash so far, so fast, etc, it allows them to make this design type the top level of play, and anyone who cannot do it should theoretically lose the raid or at least have to reset everything else to revive whichever Fighter can't do it."