Whos with me? I’d love to see the game take more skill to play on every class. IMO it would be amazing if targeting an opponent became completely irrelevant and skill shots took over.
Skillshot definition- A skillshot may be considered a Colliding skillshot if it stops and affects only the first target in its path, a Pass-through skillshot if it continues on its trajectory regardless of the targets it passes through (Some colliding skillshots have secondary area of effects that occur once they hit a target.), or a Boomerang skillshot if when thrown, will go a distance and return back to the player.
If I wanted a First Person Shooter targeting system, I would play a FPS. Sorry, but I dislike this idea.
Pretty much this. I have never really understood these type of posts. It would be like going into your Ford truck dealership and asking the salesman for something more similar to a Dodge truck.
If you want a kittening Dodge truck don’t go to the Ford dealer.
When someone uses the word ‘Meta’, a kitten dies. Don’t do it.
If you like skill shots, play an Elementalist and leave the rest of the game as is.
http://sirvincentiii.com ~ In the beginning…there was Tarnished Coast…
Full set of 5 unique skills for both dual-wield weapon sets: P/P and D/D – Make it happen
PvE – DD/CS/AC – If that didn’t work, roll a Reaper or Revenant.
I’d really like to see them explore single-target colliding skillshots.
Beyond the simple joy of using those skills, I think the idea has alot of other things going for it.
Can raise the skill ceiling and maintain the skill floor
It’s true, you can use it to raise skill floors, but the concept has alot more wiggle room than that. In particular I think this game would do well with the 2 layer hotspot variant. Where an attack has two collision boxes; a smaller collision exactly where you’re aiming, and a larger collision around that. If your attack hits the target with the larger part you still receive your effect, but if your attack hits the target with the smaller part you receive a stronger version. It’s kind of like the RPG take on the headshot/bodyshot dynamic in FPS games; greater aim gives greater reward but the game doesn’t outright demand it.
Body blocking as counterplay.
Blocks and PBReflects can do this to some extent versus particular kinds of projectiles. But ‘eating an attack for somebody else’ is honestly explored very little as a high skillceiling tactic, because of the fear it would evolve into tanking. Which is a shame, because it’s some of the more clutch moments this gameplay can offer, and I’d like to see more of it. Eating an attack for somebody as counter-play for these particular kinds of skills, could open more opportunities for this gameplay outside of blocks and reflects, without allowing too much of it.
Visually Scalable
Anytime they seem to want to add any kind of feeling of ‘aiming’ something, they seem to default to an AOE. Flipping some of these over to single-target skillshots preserves the aiming feeling of gameplay but is much more scalable on a visual clarity level. There’s no need to telegraph ‘the edges of where the effect is happening’ with particles, because the effect is you or the thing you threw.
If I wanted a First Person Shooter targeting system, I would play a FPS. Sorry, but I dislike this idea.
Pretty much this. I have never really understood these type of posts. It would be like going into your Ford truck dealership and asking the salesman for something more similar to a Dodge truck.
If you want a kittening Dodge truck don’t go to the Ford dealer.
That’s the thing, ANet blurred the line by melding MMO targeting with some action mechanics. The result is that the game is too tame for some, but too action-y for others. As far as analogies go, that one doesn’t work so well. A better one for game combat differences might be race car (action game) versus V6 sedan (GW2) vs clunky box on wheels (old-fashioned MMO).
While I (and I think, the OP) know that GW2 combat is not going to be changed that radically, sometimes it’s nice to imagine driving a race car.
Yeah, as awkward as it ended up being in practice, I can’t imagine they’d ever sincerely backpedal on the whole ‘needing a target’ thing.
But, that doesn’t mean you have to give up on improving the how the skillful play feels entirely. It’s possible to have target-based autoattack and skillshots. MOBAs work that way, for example.
That’s the thing, ANet blurred the line by melding MMO targeting with some action mechanics. The result is that the game is too tame for some, but too action-y for others. As far as analogies go, that one doesn’t work so well. A better one for game combat differences might be race car (action game) versus V6 sedan (GW2) vs clunky box on wheels (old-fashioned MMO).
While I (and I think, the OP) know that GW2 combat is not going to be changed that radically, sometimes it’s nice to imagine driving a race car.
Your analogy doesn’t seem to me to fit at all.
Simply because the OP wants ESO’s targeting system, doesn’t mean it is a good idea. Why should we ruin the game for the majority to suit a small minority?
That’s the thing, ANet blurred the line by melding MMO targeting with some action mechanics. The result is that the game is too tame for some, but too action-y for others. As far as analogies go, that one doesn’t work so well. A better one for game combat differences might be race car (action game) versus V6 sedan (GW2) vs clunky box on wheels (old-fashioned MMO).
While I (and I think, the OP) know that GW2 combat is not going to be changed that radically, sometimes it’s nice to imagine driving a race car.
Your analogy doesn’t seem to me to fit at all.
Why is that? Because you don’t want the OP’s suggestion? Because you think GW2 should be compared to a bicycle with training wheels? If you don’t explain, your comment is a non-sequitur.
Simply because the OP wants ESO’s targeting system, doesn’t mean it is a good idea. Why should we ruin the game for the majority to suit a small minority?
Try rereading my post, if you can overcome your desire to defend the status quo for a second. I didn’t call for a change, though I might prefer one. The only time a game will go through a complete combat remake is if the game is considered a failure by an overwhelming percentage of the customer base. That is obviously not going to happen, so you can relax.
As to “small minority,” how many people play action games versus how many play MMO’s in the grand scheme of things? I’d say that GW2 would have had a larger player-base with action combat and console play. That also is not going to happen, but let’s not forget that your claims about small minority are both relative and anecdotal.
Try rereading my post, if you can overcome your desire to defend the status quo for a second. I didn’t call for a change, though I might prefer one. The only time a game will go through a complete combat remake is if the game is considered a failure by an overwhelming percentage of the customer base. That is obviously not going to happen, so you can relax.
Wow, someone sure is high strung today. How you come to the conclusion that I am referring to you, when I specified “OP” in my post at every opportunity is beyond me. I mean for goodness sake, even in the quote you rudely berate me about, I am specifying “OP” as the poster I was addressing, not you.
As far as status quo goes. I paid for a game with a specific targeting system in place. I apologize if it offends anyone that I exercise my right to display my desire to keep it.
As to “small minority,” how many people play action games versus how many play MMO’s in the grand scheme of things? I’d say that GW2 would have had a larger player-base with action combat and console play. That also is not going to happen, but let’s not forget that your claims about small minority are both relative and anecdotal.
Actually, when over 3 million people own a game, and 3 people want a fundamental change, it is not anecdotal. Unless you can present evidence that officially, there is some other group requesting this. They sold well over 3 million copies. This is the “official” forums. There are only 3 posters that i see, who are arguing on the side of this concept. That is not anecdotal. That is a very very very small minority.
Wow, someone sure is high strung today. How you come to the conclusion that I am referring to you, when I specified “OP” in my post at every opportunity is beyond me. I mean for goodness sake, even in the quote you rudely berate me about, I am specifying “OP” as the poster I was addressing, not you.
As far as status quo goes. I paid for a game with a specific targeting system in place. I apologize if it offends anyone that I exercise my right to display my desire to keep it.
Actually, when over 3 million people own a game, and 3 people want a fundamental change, it is not anecdotal. Unless you can present evidence that officially, there is some other group requesting this. They sold well over 3 million copies. This is the “official” forums. There are only 3 posters that i see, who are arguing on the side of this concept. That is not anecdotal. That is a very very very small minority.
I had no intention to “berate” you, and apologize if my choice of words offended. Nor do I have any desire to stifle your self-expression. As to why I assumed you were talking to me … maybe it’s because you quoted my prior post. When I quote someone and then add something not directed at them, I draw a line between the two portions of the post. My mistake was assuming that without such an indicator, you were responding to my post.
As to 3 versus 3.5 million … while I could rebut your claim, I see no point. As I stated in both of my earlier posts, there is no way that ANet is going to change combat that radically. Thus, there is little point to continuing to discuss what is nothing more than a flight of fancy, a “Gee, what if….”
I would at least like to see more skill shots on the classes which are already considered difficult to master.