DPS Meter Megathread

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

The last Basic Melee livestream showed us that they are testing Active Block and there was a backdash on Fighter that would not even be allowed in most fighting games due to being too broken in terms of its frame data.

If they keep going in this direction, Ashes will be more frame data heavy than literally any game I know except Under Night.

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

Ok, now I completely concede that I understand your points all this time.

If you don't care about people having Frame Data in Ashes, then what you have been saying is completely consistent and I apologize for every time I have derailed you from representing your perspective with my insistence on trying to equate your dislike of Trackers with a dislike of 'information that players use to improve their combat after the fact'.

I know you don't care if I'm cool with you or not, but I promise to bother you less, now that I know this.

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

Nah, we're talking about 'Fighter held up a sword against an attack and mitigated damage from the attack and then recovered from block stance', and 'fighter used a backdash that moved them 8 character widths in 5 frames and recovered for another 25 frames' which is enough to dodge almost ANYTHING honestly.

Have you not seen that video at all?

EDIT: Here, it's at 6:45, the glorious backdash. I remember having the 'WTF' reaction followed by the Thor 'Yessss!' meme.

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

Normally I expect you to discredit or say I'm not skilled so I don't talk about this, since I don't want to get into an argument with you about it.

I am the type of skilled player who has reached the point where she can mostly only improve by knowing the Frame Data (either through experimentation or directly using the things provided by Training mode to check it).

Yes, there is 'more to it', but my experience is that you do reach a point where you have to know in order to see more options or you're just guessing. If you believe that it's better for people to just guess, I understand your perspective. I don't think they make Fighting Games like that anymore, but I'm not going to say 'no, you're wrong'.

I think I've been trying to tell you that good PvE feels like that too, but I understand your reasons for not believing me about that.

Azherae wrote: »

Bots are stopped by creating layered scenarios where they must anticipate a probabilistic sequence without sufficient training data. These days, that's the only way.

So smth like "if the boss had rune set X, you should do action 1 or 2; if the boss doesn't react to action 1 - do action 2". And those reactions could vary from some kind of movement to some form of visual dmg on the boss' body.

Would that work or is it still too simplistic? Cause I feel like you could still put in reactionary actions into the bot, and at the end of the day pretty much any player action is just a reaction to whatever the boss does.

Orrrrr, would pro-active actions work? As in, "players have to hit the boss with particular abilities which will result in one of several responses from the boss, which then determine what players gotta do next".

NiKr wrote: »

Orrrrr, would pro-active actions work? As in, "players have to hit the boss with particular abilities which will result in one of several responses from the boss, which then determine what players gotta do next".

This is closer to something that works in my experience.

A different way to think of this might be what I do for training mode in fighters.

Boss has Inputs A, B, C, D, E chosen completely randomly.

Boss will do something different when B follows A, than when B follows B. That gives you 25 options.

But let's say that whatever follows BB takes so long that it 'skips a count'. So you can only see BB twice in a row if it 'selected B four times'.

Then add some player inputs in terms of what abilities they hit with. You can do it by expanding it to FGHI, or just 'if you hit the boss a certain way while it's selecting B it will change B to A'. So you could 'make sure that the boss only chooses AA, AB, AC, AD, AE, BUT you could only do this if you 'knew it was going to select B' or 'did the ability because you saw it use CA and know that AB will kill you but AA wouldn't' (while still having to worry about AC, AD, AE).

A human will adapt to this using their intent, status of the team, and teamwork, in a different way than most bots will, but still not be in a situation where they have no control and zero predictability, nor (if you found this to be negative) in a situation where 'absolute randomness whenever' was possible.

In this situation a Tracker would do much less for you in terms of 'figuring out the boss' because you would already know the odds of any specific thing happening (they're all about 1 in 25 and you can reduce them through your own actions when your abilities to influence it aren't on cooldown, to get it down to 1 in 5).

But now the player's side is constantly finding having to find new ways to adapt to whatever is happening, and the Tracker is only doing what I (personally) am used to it being for. Allowing the player to look back at a specific point in a long fight and think "Oh, I could have done this better even considering the randomness", or of course 'Dammit Carl, you missed the proc six times this fight, you know you're supposed to leave the adds to someone else when EB is happening' (some people need a tracker for this, some don't).

Devs could then 'lower the odds of CA, technically, by making it so that CB and CC take so long that any CA following it never does CA'. Maybe if it's like, a dragon, CCC causes it to do an extra long breath blast, etc etc.

Then just set whatever win conditions you like and change 'damage' to be 'something that affects the selection'.instead of 'something that kills the boss'. Cooldowns alone would generally mean that you need the same number of people anyway, but now you've removed that visible 'Input->Output' part of the Runes thing.

Another useful part of it in Ashes (for example) is that you COULD theoretically spawn a boss with a different subset of A, B, C, D, E each time, and the combinations change, without players having to literally guess every moment. e.g. if you see Ice Breath, you know that at least two of the boss' 'slots' are 'Push' and 'Ice', so you can immediately start guessing/adapting to what the rest of their kit will be (this has nothing to do with bots, they would do that too, this is just a bonus).

Hope we see mechanics like that in Ashes. Pro-active player action is always more fun than reactionary (imo).

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

I don't know if anyone actually needs to hear this, but this is, of course, not true.

They've recently put a lot of work into reducing the number of these required to play effectively, but they're still there.

I expect to see more of them in Ashes, though.