10-15 SECONDS TTK

I don't think the context is that necessary. PvP video games have been around since 1991, and 15 second rounds of Street Fighter are deeply unsatisfying. Going even lower than that for, as Steven stated, even gear levels is even worse.

Maybe take a moment to look into games about fighting one another, and use them as a measuring stick for what feels good in terms of engagement. Once you have that, gear scaling and group sizing handles the rest.

We have not received permission from Mag7spy to share the quoted post.

Based on your own words here and based on having watched that clip, it sounds like what you actually enjoy is having a 1-player game disguised as pvp. I don't think anyone here has a problem with you getting a 12 second TTK in Ashes if the opponent fumbles everything, but it's also not relevant.

That video also starts when one of the players is already injured. Is there some valid reason we aren't counting the time it took for that into the TTK? Doubly irrelevant.

Also can I just say, if you were trying to be genuinely useful, wouldn't you be sharing a clip with a working game timer? We can check approximately how long the fight was using the clip 's timer, but if we wanted any kind of precision when talking about how long defensive options add or subtract from the TTK, we'd want the match timer working.

This is a weird mix of disingenuous and not useful.

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

In that quote above Steven explains, dps kill each other faster, while others kill each other slower, but average is ~10 for "faster" and ~30 for "slower". To me that phrasing implies not a "the target doesn't do shit" test.

edit to add: I'm mainly taking that implication because otherwise healers and tanks dying THREE TIMES as slow would imply that their hp/def values are fucking three times higher than that of dps (if it was a "target doesn't do shit' test) and I sure as hell hope that is not the case, especially considering how both cleric and tank were considered kinda OP in A1 cause one could both heal and do dmg, while the other was a CC machine that still did ok dps.

So them just standing around and STILL dying in 30s instead of 10s would imply that if were they do use their skills - they'd be literally unbeatable.

We have not received permission from Mag7spy to share the quoted post.

I'm not sure if this kinda thing usually works for you with other people? So let's break it down.

I understand the context you were replying to wrt "not satisfying in a fighting game to win in 15 seconds". It's because I understand it, that I replied you seemed to prefer 1-player games disguised as pvp.

It's not called trying to heavily read into a post when you make the most immediate surface level observations available based on what a person is saying and showing. Trying to heavily read into a post would be more like me coming up with a personality profile based on these replies, which I haven't bothered to do. And this is neither here nor there but is there a particular merit to "not reading into things"? In general, it figures one would try to understand where the other person is coming from.

The second round that you so kindly "spoon fed" to me is worse than the first one. I counted 5-6 fumbles from your opponent in that one, as opposed to 3-4 in the first one. Please do correct me if I misjudged what is happening there, I'd love to have my opinion changed. I have no doubts you enjoyed beating on that helpless opponent, and I make no claims otherwise. I also know from experience that dealing damage in most fighting games involves hours of grinding execution, it's an actual skill. It just isn't interactive skill for the most part. When your opponent fumbles, you get closer to a 1-player game in function, which is what I said.

Also, I'm only going to say this once. People can make reasonable judgments/inferences about your internet persona based on what that persona says and shows. Particularly since you said it so explicitly on your own.


___________________________________________________________
For everyone else just trying to get something useful out of this, here it is: people do often enjoy beating their opponent down for 12-15 seconds or however long. That's not the problem. The problem is when people approach design questions based on this, because the second you've done that, you're basically running with the assumption the shoe will never be on the other foot, that you will never have to sit there for 12-15 seconds of failing to do anything relevant before just being dead. Game designers cannot afford not to ask "well what if the situation was reversed, would the person still enjoy that? would they feel like they have agency?"

There are of course people who just want to take turns with their opponent on who gets to combo the other one, but I hope we can all agree here, this isn't very interactive.

There is little difference between a target dummy and someone who fumbles every defensive reaction when it comes to the time it takes to kill them. It doesn't particularly make sense for Intrepid to design around that, does it? Most people imagine themselves putting up at least a reasonable level of fight, which would make more sense to tune TTK around.