We see it in almost every MMO out there how melee mobs just sprint to a player and attack in melee range the whole time. Birds fly 3 feet off the ground at perfect stabbing height. Even in table top games some DMs will have the super mobile flying dragon with powerful ranged attacks land to easily be surrounded by players and attacked.
We heard how VR plans to make ranged attackers more complicated which is great, but does VR have any plans to have say wyverns or flocks of birds swoop down and attack then fly back out of reach of melee? Will Rhino like creatures charge through the group and turn around to do it again? Will the pack of wolves have each wolf lunging in for a bite then back off looking for an ideal strike?
For the most part? I doubt it. Gameplay > Realism for some of this kind of stuff. Having birds flying out of range of melee and similar things is a massive disadvantage to melee dps classes while ranged suffer no problems. I can't think of any similar common cases where the opposite would be true to give melee the edge. And even then something like that would probably make Ranger the DPS kings seeing as they excel in both ranged and melee.
Iksar said:For the most part? I doubt it. Gameplay > Realism for some of this kind of stuff. Having birds flying out of range of melee and similar things is a massive disadvantage to melee dps classes while ranged suffer no problems. I can't think of any similar common cases where the opposite would be true to give melee the edge. And even then something like that would probably make Ranger the DPS kings seeing as they excel in both ranged and melee.
There is a simple and hated method to give a penalty to Ranged classes - LOS. Tank in the way, can't shoot, sloped ground, can't shoot, around a corner, can't shoot. 10 melee in a raid, all ranged are useless except AE abilities.
Many realistic tactical and strategic systems just make a multiplayer game less fun. They work fine in single player, or squad pvp games, but in pve, they lose their charm.
About the most glaringly unrealistic, immersion-breaking combat is melee fighting a bird which "hovers" in place while you both take turns attacking (with no attempt to dodge or block). I would rather have zero birds in Pantheon than see this.
If a bird actually attacks, it's via a fly-by dive bomb from behind and you don't see it coming (I speak from experience on this). I'd like to see birds as a low damage, hard to hit swarm nuance and not a static melee foe. They could be used to disrupt casters and create chaos. Walking into a new area could trigger this as well as them waiting for you to be in a fight before they join in. Melee can queue up an attack and it fires as the bird passes. Ranged attacks that don't kill outright should knock the bird to the ground temporarily.
I know combat needs to be fun more than realistic, but part of Pantheon’s appeal is that it's a world, not just a game, so it needs a bit more verisimilitude than most games to really feel like a world.
It seems silly to have combat work with a heavily armored warrior swinging at a bat that just stays within striking distance, but it works.
I would love to turn a corner and see a warrior struggling to land a blow on a bat that keeps swooping and diving around them. Hear the frustration and calling out for a caster or Ranger to take it on. But it's just unreasonable. Maybe when things progress and VR is sitting on a pile of cash 10 years from now they can buy a license for the AI that can port the game into a virtual reality version and then swinging and dancing takes on a whole other level.
@StoneFish I don't know that it would be all that hard to create flying and swooping attacks (it might require custom programming but might also be a default movement option in Unity). If it's resource-intensive to do, I don't think it needs to be done. But if that's the case, VR should avoid the problem altogether by not allowing combat with real-looking birds.
Give us fictional creatures that look like they can hover in place. Not something that looks like a seagull that we're supposed to believe can hover by flapping its wings once every two seconds. Also, six people fighting a seagull to death is also not very interesting nor does it make me feel like an adventurer in an epic fantasy. It makes me feel like a bored sociopathic teenager.
Mobility goes beyond simply flying creatures. For single mobs you have things like charge attacks or mounted cavalry mobs making big attacks before a retreat to set up the attack again. Spiders or other fast climbing creatures able to quickly climb walls and escape if no one has shut down that option.
Mobility also plays into group dynamics a ton but this is far harder to code. I mentioned before how a pack of wolves wouldn't all be standing in a circle but moving around at close range, but the same applies to intelligent NPCs. A weakened NPC in a group of NPCs making use of an allies stun or a snare to run away is great. Throwing daggers while waiting for an opportunity to strike an opening is a great tactic for a wounded NPC. Some mobs smart enough to know not to stand in an easy to AOE formation around a target.
I wouldn't mind seeing unique mobility introduced into encounters. However, I think that any situation which prevents a class from engaging in combat for an extended amount of time is bad. For example, I wouldn't mind seeing a flying creature being able to fly up out of melee range for a brief period. However, that creature would also need to fly back down and become attackable again by melee for a period. Then to add class dependency in this encounter the mob's ability to fly up could be prevented by rotating stuns, or by a spell caster using a root-like spell.
I think that the introduction of unique mechanics to combat is generally a good thing. However, anything that prevents a player from being able to engage for long extended periods is not good for the player's experience and overall health of the game.
Counterfleche said:@StoneFish I don't know that it would be all that hard to create flying and swooping attacks (it might require custom programming but might also be a default movement option in Unity). If it's resource-intensive to do, I don't think it needs to be done. But if that's the case, VR should avoid the problem altogether by not allowing combat with real-looking birds.
Give us fictional creatures that look like they can hover in place. Not something that looks like a seagull that we're supposed to believe can hover by flapping its wings once every two seconds. Also, six people fighting a seagull to death is also not very interesting nor does it make me feel like an adventurer in an epic fantasy. It makes me feel like a bored sociopathic teenager.
Ive mentioned this before and there have been good reasons- exploitative related and established gameplay reasons- mentioned why it was not a good idea surrounding being able to hurt yourself. But, I think this might be a good case for AE or rain type effects. The Bad being the tank will get hit by the casters rain or AE spell but so will the Bat, hopefully the bat more-so. Like the caster being able to be hit by their own spells if they step into the rain or AE of another making the AE/Rain spells particularly dangerous or requiring extra consideration or care. A rangers AE net snare coupled with a casters Fire rain may be enough to singe off or cripple the wings of a flying beastie if they are careful enough. Once landed the beastie may be more dangerous with one wild wing flying about *right-smash* or if tucked more protected *right invulnerable*. I pity the Player bait that does not run out of the net-trap fast enough once the trap is sprung. If mechanics can be created in such a way. Again, sparse and specific use. Let the sandbox discover dangers or uniqueness.
My understanding is that Visionary Realms intends that Mobs in Pantheon exhibit a variety of more or less intelligent behaviors.
So I imagine that some dire ravens might swoop in and out, pecking at your health until they think your end is in sight, others might tear at your flesh but only as long as there's a swarm along them, while others might just tear off some important bit and then flee off with it.
I once thought that giving Mobs genetic algorithms that learned which tactics worked in practice might be a good idea, but now I think that would be awful. Clever players could train the Mobs to behave a certain way, while AIs left to their own devices could make encounters very unpleasant.
Jobeson said: @FatedEmperor How is it more fun for the problem to simply solve itself? I don't see how it's more fun for mobs to be dumb and approach to be killed with ease than it is for the warriors to pull out a bow or hurl an axe or a net or time a knockdown or Paladins stunning with magic, rogues shooting poisoned arrows, etc. Should the ranged AI VR talked about also run into melee range eventually for you?
To me it is more that this would necessitate each melee having a handful of viable/strong damaging ranged attacks (or simple solution abilities that ground flying/charging/mobile mobs) and how that might alter class identities if not homogenize to some degree. If not? Ranger seems like it would be king DPS with a full suite of both melee and ranged attacks, perfectly comfortable no matter the situation and never missing a beat.
Iksar said:Jobeson said: @FatedEmperor How is it more fun for the problem to simply solve itself? I don't see how it's more fun for mobs to be dumb and approach to be killed with ease than it is for the warriors to pull out a bow or hurl an axe or a net or time a knockdown or Paladins stunning with magic, rogues shooting poisoned arrows, etc. Should the ranged AI VR talked about also run into melee range eventually for you?To me it is more that this would necessitate each melee having a handful of viable/strong damaging ranged attacks (or simple solution abilities that ground flying/charging/mobile mobs) and how that might alter class identities if not homogenize to some degree. If not? Ranger seems like it would be king DPS with a full suite of both melee and ranged attacks, perfectly comfortable no matter the situation and never missing a beat.
With limited action sets, this seems unlikely. In all probability, even if given tools necessary to engage this type of mob, players would make a point to avoid the encounters. I suspect even rangers will be required to focus on ranged or melee combat, not a subset of both. They will be able to change strategically, but not tactically.
Silvermink said: I suspect even rangers will be required to focus on ranged or melee combat, not a subset of both. They will be able to change strategically, but not tactically.
That is more or less the opposite of what VR has touted as the playstyle of Rangers. It also ignores their 2 abilities of "Engage" and "Withdraw", which allow them to rapidly move back and forth from Bow range to Melee range while in combat, each of which guarantees a crit on their next ability used.
The last comment I know of on the subject is from the Sept 2019 Newsletter:
"Moving forward, the design of the Ranger class will focus on keeping them viable and competitive in DPS both at range and in melee combat, while leveraging their ability to weave between short and long range combat to create situational advantages that they can exploit while maintaining incredibly high mobility." ~Joppa
If they have indicated something different more recently, please tell me where so I can go read it.
I agree that monsters (especially intelligent ones) should use range and line-of-sight more intelligently - it could be more challenging, interesting, immersive and fun - but I am also always remembering that VR aren't designing an action combat simulation.
All the graphics and animations and even the combat mechanics are just analogs to what would be happening if it were more 'real'.
A bird isn't really floating there in combat range, but it is modelled that way to simplify things greatly and to represent the meaningful aspects of the combat.
Devs could either have it seemingly float there but give it a high armor class and 'swoop' special abilitites to represent it 'flying around' or give it a normal animal's low armour class but do the coding work to have it fly around and swoop in and out.
Of course this should also require action combat mechanics and animations and very low latency client-server capability to support players leaping to attack birds as they swoop or ranged attack players trying to hit small, fast flying objects above them, or it still won't feel 'real' - why would the birds fly around, dodging and swooping, but players get to just tab-target 'lock on' and automatically perform attacking/defending moves?
Unsurprisingly, devs choose to avoid the very complex system requirements, mechanics, animations and monster AI and represent it with analogous stats and abilities, but yeah, as I first said, I think some improved use of range and LOS would be nice because that might not be prohibitively hard to code and would go match the kind of range and LOS tactics that players can employ.
I'm actually a little nervous of the few 'action combat' ideas VR have suggested thus far, like 'aimed' bow shots and shield bashes. Since we have otherwise tactical tab-target combat, those kind of abilities feel like a potentially unwieldy disruption to the flow and style of combat, but we'll see, I guess.
In relation to this thread, it will be interesting to see, since monsters are based on classes and their abilities in Pantheon, whether monsters will also employ the 'action combat'-like abilities that player characters may have.
disposalist said:Of course this should also require action combat mechanics and animations and very low latency client-server capability to support players leaping to attack birds as they swoop or ranged attack players trying to hit small, fast flying objects above them, or it still won't feel 'real' - why would the birds fly around, dodging and swooping, but players get to just tab-target 'lock on' and automatically perform attacking/defending moves?
Latency could be solved with Queuing attacks. The ready action from table top games would have its place in MMOs if mobs like this existed. Shield bash the target as soon as they are in range.
As for the birds flying defensively in the air, having high dodge chance for all bolt spells and projectile attacks up in the air would make sense if VR wanted to differentiate attack types more. I would imagine warriors/pallies could take a defensive shield stance to have similar results with their shields. Progressing through ranged fights using defensive skills or the wood wall or whatever else VR cooks up to handle various problems is exciting.
Having the right abilities prepared on the action set to fight flying or climbing targets would be a fun part of grouping. Never having a perfect build because there are too many contengencies to cover so you are trying to cover what you expect is what I hope the LAS brings us. The first giant wasps to fly after the group who got too close to the nest high up in the goblin cave or the first ranged spider launching web attacks from the wall as the party realizes its not just the frontline spiders to contend with is a fun time. The oh **** moments the LAS brings out in trying to handle a situation you were not expecting sounds like a ton of fun. Having mobs that use mobility simply adds to the number of variants.
I think this would be totally doable. I'm not sure how fun it would be, but making it tactical shouldn't be terrible. Melee characters should have an answer for ranged mobs, just like melee mobs should have an answer for ranged characters. This makes it so both styles of play have pros and cons against certain mobs.
I'll include some of the examples provided by Jobeson.
A bird can keep away from melee, but instead of a dive bomb, think of a pecking attack. Have 3-5 second period where the mob goes into melee range and is susceptible to a "Grounded" status when hit by melee weapons.
An enemy caster takes more dmg from melee, while having an anti-ranged shield that reduces all ranged damage.
A rhino charges the group constantly. If you don't sidestep the charge you get stunned, but if you dodge then hit them from behind (ranged or melee) the mob gets a "Crippled" status stopping it from charging.
A wolf quickly gets into melee range with a sprint ability, forcing rangers into melee and having a higher chance to interrupt spell casting.
These could all be countered with CC's of course making them equally susceptible to both ranged and melee attackers, but it would help incorporate the strengths and weakness of ranged and melee damage dealers without making one more consistently easier or powerful against all mobs.