Randomness in CC

BowbowDAoC · March 2013

Randomness could easily be combined with CC.

Just like damage was randomised so could be a mezz (if mezz there will be), could have a time range effect instead a specific time effect, i.e. between 25 to 50 seconds instead of lets say 45 seconds.

same if the type of CC implemented would be "a la WAR",like pulls per say, could be from 10 to 40 feet instead of 40 feet all the time.

What do you think ?

Raefar · March 2013

That actually is a good idea...

meddyck · March 2013

I don't mind the idea as long as the range of durations was pretty narrow so you would at least have a pretty good sense of what would happen when you cast the spell. But it's more important that immunity timers, abilities like Purge, and cures are done right.

BowbowDAoC · March 2013

Originally posted by meddyck
I don't mind the idea as long as the range of durations was pretty narrow so you would at least have a pretty good sense of what would happen when you cast the spell. But it's more important that immunity timers, abilities like Purge, and cures are done right.

I agree, but at the same time, the range of durations shouldnt be too narrow either otherwise it kinda nullify the purpose of randomness.

a % "around" the initial amount of time could be determined, i.e. 25% longer or shorter. so for example a "30 seconds" mezz could last as little as 22 seconds or as long as 38 seconds.

Or it could be set as a number of "rounds" (depending on game mechanics regarding whole combat system i.e. 4 to 7 rounds of 5 seconds rounds)

or it could be different, but randomness of it would actually change the strategy we re used to in that CC model.

Saevel · March 2013

I like the idea. I think it might even make people slightly more tolerant to CC.

Teh_Axi · March 2013

I don't really like the idea, for me the only randomnes I like in RPGs in general is critical hits. Even then its only because that stops the game from being purely a matter of maths, the spikes of damage create situations where players are more vulnerable then they would be otherwise.

I could maybe see something like an AoE CC guaranteed to hit 3 targets, then a chance to effect nearby targets. I dont really think random durations would work out that well, honestly I think it would just make people rage even more.

Mud_Monster · March 2013

I don't like the idea either. I'm not really a fan of luck/randomness in a PvP focused game. I am fine with some randomness in damage though (crits) for the same reason Teh_Axi mentioned.

BowbowDAoC · March 2013

Originally posted by Teh_Axi
I don't really like the idea, for me the only randomnes I like in RPGs in general is critical hits. Even then its only because that stops the game from being purely a matter of maths, the spikes of damage create situations where players are more vulnerable then they would be otherwise.

I could maybe see something like an AoE CC guaranteed to hit 3 targets, then a chance to effect nearby targets. I dont really think random durations would work out that well, honestly I think it would just make people rage even more.

But, if some randomness is implemented regarding who will be CCed, it would become even more frustrating for the caster, since we usually have a specific ennemy we really want to see mezzed (healers, mezzers), so having everyone,s chances of being mezzed equal, but playing on the duration of it would kinda, i think, allowing some randomness in CC without frustrating either side.

and what about single mezzes ? ( or any other CC ), we couldnt implement randomness in that using your method, but it would still work with duration.

OgreRaper · March 2013

Yes! This is something I've thought about before. There should definitely be randomness in CC. You shouldn't know exactly when your root/mez/whatever will wear off.

Odaman · March 2013

Range on durations, yeah I suppose that's ok... I wouldn't ask for it though

Range on how many targets a spell effects sounds terrible.

BowbowDAoC · March 2013

#8 - This should be a chaotic game with epic surprises at every turn">Foundational Principle #8 – This should be a chaotic game with epic surprises at every turn

i wont copy the whole thing, but randomness in CC would totally fit in this principle. and to make your day, yeah they also intend to work on thos critical shots to make them even more "chaotic" too

Teh_Axi · March 2013

Originally posted by BowbowDAoC
since we usually have a specific ennemy we really want to see mezzed (healers, mezzers)

I was thinking a long the lines of the primary target and two nearby being the guaranteed targets. I should have been more specific but my point was to retain a degree control over what happens.

And I'm pretty sure that you would get furstrated everytime you get a short CC or the targets everytime they get stuck in a long one. Like I said, I don't really like the idea at all. I'd rather countering CC be a matter of gearing and ability usage.

meddyck · March 2013

I saw the mention of damage criticals up in the thread and that got me thinking. What if there was also a chance for a CC critical? IOW, your mezz normally lasts 30 seconds. But you have a 10% chance for a critical when mezzing that would be in a range of, say, 10-33% of your standard duration. So you could potentially mezz for up to 40 seconds if you got the max crit. Then you could also have gear bonuses, stat point bonuses, or realm ability bonuses that would increase your chance of a CC critical. This would be a more random way of having the % duration bonus from TOA.

CrazKanuk · March 2013

Originally posted by BowbowDAoC
Randomness could easily be combined with CC.

Just like damage was randomised so could be a mezz (if mezz there will be), could have a time range effect instead a specific time effect, i.e. between 25 to 50 seconds instead of lets say 45 seconds.

same if the type of CC implemented would be "a la WAR",like pulls per say, could be from 10 to 40 feet instead of 40 feet all the time.

What do you think ?

Are you only talking duration, area, etc? I mean if you're talking about randomness with CC, what about chances to miss altogether?

Vynt · March 2013

There was already a random aspect in mez in daoc, and some not so random. People could resist it. There were also mez reduction, while not random, it was from the point of view of the mezzer. They think they have 30sec, but then person is free in 5 seconds.

Don't really think it needs to be more random that that. As long as resists affect the cc, you wont really know how long exactly it wll last or if it will even hit. Sure you can quickly cast it a second time to make sure you hit them, but that 2nd cast that hits the already mezzed people cuts those times in half, so don't really want to chain cast mez on people.

dynamicipftw · March 2013

Another horrible idea.

BowbowDAoC · March 2013

Originally posted by CrazKanuk
Originally posted by BowbowDAoC
Randomness could easily be combined with CC.

Just like damage was randomised so could be a mezz (if mezz there will be), could have a time range effect instead a specific time effect, i.e. between 25 to 50 seconds instead of lets say 45 seconds.

same if the type of CC implemented would be "a la WAR",like pulls per say, could be from 10 to 40 feet instead of 40 feet all the time.

What do you think ?

Are you only talking duration, area, etc? I mean if you're talking about randomness with CC, what about chances to miss altogether?

Yeah i guess it could be done too, but having a "total fizzle" on i.e. an AoE spell now that would be really frustrating.

I was mostly trying to bring some new ideas according to some of the principles that MJ wants to base his game on, although not to the extend of leaving more people frustrated by it, but to add some fun factors via some of those principles, while also thinking outside the box from what we experienced in DAoC.

Edit : i'm also trying to be careful as to not pass a certain point where too much randomness could do more hurt then good, so having too much randomness (as compared to none) wouldnt be better.

Raefar · March 2013

Randomness is not a bad thing, the problem with posting it is you have so many people that are looking for a daoc v2.0... There are reasons I stopped playing daoc (mostly college) but there were others. Yes it was a good game for its time but things have changed since 2001. I have faith in MJ to delivery an awsome game and can't wait to see what he comes up with.

OgreRaper · March 2013

Originally posted by Raefar
Randomness is not a bad thing, the problem with posting it is you have so many people that are looking for a daoc v2.0... There are reasons I stopped playing daoc (mostly college) but there were others. Yes it was a good game for its time but things have changed since 2001. I have faith in MJ to delivery an awsome game and can't wait to see what he comes up with.

True. There are people who want a reboot of DAOC. I do not. There's much to be improved upon from DAOC, and I'm sure MJ will do it.

dynamicipftw · March 2013

Originally posted by Raefar
Randomness is not a bad thing, the problem with posting it is you have so many people that are looking for a daoc v2.0... There are reasons I stopped playing daoc (mostly college) but there were others. Yes it was a good game for its time but things have changed since 2001. I have faith in MJ to delivery an awsome game and can't wait to see what he comes up with.

I played DAoC again in 2010-2012. It's still the best PvP out there (sadly)

sweetdigs · March 2013

My thoughts:

1. There is always some randomness inherent in CCs if you have resists in the game. Resists are a good random mechanism because you can improve your resists typically through gear and spells, while the caster can typically counter resists in some form with his abilities or gear. This is a randomness that is influenced by the players.

2. I'm fine with some additional randomness in effects, particularly in a PVP-focused game where you're not going to be camping dungeons where if the ogre knocks you back another 10 feet, you trigger the camp next door's aggro and they all then descend upon you wiping out your group. Note that I wouldn't particularly be opposed to that, but a LOT of people would. I personally think it would add more challenge to the game and be fun.

3. I do think, however, that less CC is more. I don't want to see people ping ponging around the battlefield or being chain-stunned or mezzed. And I don't want there to have to be "immunities" (which I think are a terrible design mechanism and cop out for poorly designed CC in the first place) or self-purges. A dispel magic spell that counters a mez or something like that is fine since it's not a self-used timed purge, which just makes no sense. CC should not be the primary battlefield component, IMHO, and its use should be limited and very valuable. Even a stun of a few seconds or an interrupt of a caster's spell can be an incredibly valuable tool on the battlefield. But nobody wants to spend their entire fight being chain stunned, mezzed, or bounced around like a ping pong ball.

BowbowDAoC · March 2013

yeah many people would really love this to be DAoC 2, and i cant blame them, but i really think that MJ will keep all the good stuff from pre-NF, remove what was bad from NF/ToA and after, and work around that to improve what was great pre-NF/ToA, BUT adding also different new things, and new is good, if all works well altogether.

I simply love to suggest new ideas, not to have them all implemented, but mostly to suggest, and when bringing up new ideas, it creates a brainstorming session that CSE could use to bring more good stuff in CU, with the 10 principles as a valid base for him to make what according to him would make a great mmorpg.

They want and need our suggestions/feedback etc. and whether anyone approve or disapprove those ideas, its still a good so it immediatly gives them feedback from other players than the one suggesting something, plus it can bring new ideas to CSE too.

Vargur · March 2013

I like this idea since it increases the chaos factor and I prefer the chaos of big fights over the surgical precision of the mezz wars.

naezgul · March 2013

Originally posted by meddyck
I don't mind the idea as long as the range of durations was pretty narrow so you would at least have a pretty good sense of what would happen when you cast the spell. But it's more important that immunity timers, abilities like Purge, and cures are done right.

I disagree, the wider the range the better!

you may waste a purge on a 5 sec mez

I think people against this are the teams that liked being able to ale insta mez 10 people then killing one at a time at leisure.

this is not good for the game....the more chaos the better

shaodrin · March 2013

Originally posted by BowbowDAoC
yeah many people would really love this to be DAoC 2, and i cant blame them, but i really think that MJ will keep all the good stuff from pre-NF, remove what was bad from NF/ToA and after, and work around that to improve what was great pre-NF/ToA, BUT adding also different new things, and new is good, if all works well altogether.

lets not hope he takes the of/pretoa stuff but todays daoc as a "base" for his game incase he does anything like that ... daoc wasnt ever as balanced as its today- of daoc was a shit against that O_o

Plastic-Metal · March 2013

Interesting idea. I'm not fully sold on it, but it would go well with Mark's FP regarding chaos in CU. The obvious downside is that it would remove from the strategic side of the game that made DAoC successful. Yes, a full group could potentially kill two to three times their numbers, but it required pint-point precision.

I'd like to see what Mark thinks about the idea.

Howdy, Stranger!

Randomness in CC

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Randomness in CC

Comments