Would people be interested for toolbox-combat, rather than rotation base with all d dots into play?

Howda

Imagine if skills are a toolbox, not just dot rotations. Do this if you want the boss to be weaker on fire attacks. Stagger boss so he gets stunned for burst. For stun use specific skills to bring boss into stun mode. Etc etc.

Amottica

We currently have a toolbox of skills and sets. In an organized raid group, PvE and PvP, we ensure we have the buffs and debuffs to make us stronger and our targets weaker. The same goes for our gear.

In ESO a "rotation" is not about building procs to make specific skills hit harder since it is about the timing of skills coming off cooldown/DoT needs to be refreshed.

Taril

Yes

Overall, yes.

But realistically, it will be about how things are done.

Like, on a base level, I'm not too enthused by ESO's "Rotation" where you just mindlessly press your abilities to maintain uptime on your DoTs, Buffs and Debuffs.

More dynamism would be preferable, where your skill usage is more tuned to things happening (Not necessarily "Press the shiny button when a proc happens" - But things like states. Off-balance enemy, enemy at certain health percentages etc)

The main issue that can arise when attempting to create state based decision making with skills lies in ESO's base combat mechanics. That being, the global resources and lack of cooldowns. Wherein the problem will arise where when such a state comes up (Such as an enemy being off balance) you will simply spam the ability that benefits from that state and nothing else, which can end up being less engaging.

Generally, it's a pretty difficult thing to achieve. Which is why no games really do it particularly well and instead fall back on either static rotations or "Priority" systems.

Nerouyn

Amottica wrote: »

In ESO a "rotation" is not about building procs to make specific skills hit harder since it is about the timing of skills coming off cooldown/DoT needs to be refreshed.

I think it's extremely telling that you said this.

ESO doesn't have cooldowns.

Personally I can't stand games with cooldowns and the mindless repetition of rotations they necessitate and while ESO doesn't have cooldowns (other than on set procs), its combat nevertheless devolves into the same style of mindless repetition of rotations.

It's one of the reasons I don't play group content in this game.

The other is "mechanics".

I haven't heard the term "toolbox combat" before but it sounds like they're describing content where player abilities are what beat bosses, not memorizing paths through mazes like rats.

Yes please.

Howda

Yes

Nerouyn wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

In ESO a "rotation" is not about building procs to make specific skills hit harder since it is about the timing of skills coming off cooldown/DoT needs to be refreshed.

I think it's extremely telling that you said this.

ESO doesn't have cooldowns.

Personally I can't stand games with cooldowns and the mindless repetition of rotations they necessitate and while ESO doesn't have cooldowns (other than on set procs), its combat nevertheless devolves into the same style of mindless repetition of rotations.

It's one of the reasons I don't play group content in this game.

The other is "mechanics".

I haven't heard the term "toolbox combat" before but it sounds like they're describing content where player abilities are what beat bosses, not memorizing paths through mazes like rats.

Yes please.

ESO essentially does not have cooldowns. However the duration effectively adds hidden cooldowns in order to maximize efficiency. So casting a skill that last for 24 seconds "kind of is a soft cooldown" this is something I also don't like and I am talking about skills with effects that can bring an event or impact a chain combo needed from other classes is more action combat than having a rotation with 24 sec duration skills and 1 spammable.

Few examples

If a warden applies, chill. Every Sorc shock damage is increased by 5%.

If a DK applies burning the next decease skill from a Necro brings disoriented status where the enemy misses attacks.

These are simple examples. It can go much more complicated and can bring some combos among classes for the identity, etc.

Nerouyn

@Howda

Ah yes, one of my other long-time pet hates about this game are the 'press x now' synergies. More immersive and engaging skills interactions would be welcomed by me.

They were a big part of City of Heroes' success. At launch there was no kind of end-game at all, but players kept playing because playing was intrinsically fun and fresh.

Instead of classes, they had archetypes- tank, blaster (dps), defender (healer / buffer / debuffer), controller - and during character creation you could choose a primary and secondary power set from a pool.

Especially when PUg'ing, every time you did group content that experience was fresh because the powers of others in your group were so variable.

Also, there were immersive and meaningful power interactions.

Some power pools allowed characters to create oil slicks which caused mobs to slip and fall constantly.

Other power pools (belonging to other archetypes) could ignite them.

The storm summoning set included a hectic, wild tornado which would throw mobs around willy nilly and was widely properly regarded as annoying as hell in PvE whether solo'ing or in groups.

However, immobilized (eg. by controllers) enemies are rooted in place. On them that tornado simply does huge amounts of damage.

Taril

Yes

Nerouyn wrote: »

They were a big part of City of Heroes' success. At launch there was no kind of end-game at all, but players kept playing because playing was intrinsically fun and fresh.

Ahh, City of Heroes... It had one of my favourite combat sets for an MMO with its Dual Blades powerset.

Using the 8 abilities from the powerset, you had 4 combinations of 3 attack chains to create a combo effect.

With each ability having a different cooldown, you rotated between the different combos based on what was available and what combo effect was required at the time.

Making it quite engaging to play.

Nerouyn wrote: »

Instead of classes, they had archetypes- tank, blaster (dps), defender (healer / buffer / debuffer), controller - and during character creation you could choose a primary and secondary power set from a pool.

Well... Archetype was simply another name for class.

Each class had a unique mechanic and pool of powers - Even if multiple classes shared a powerset in a pool there were often differences between them.

Meaning the classes were Tanker, Scrapper, Blaster, Defender, Controller, Peacebringer and Warshade with City of Villains bringing their villainous counterparts of Bruiser, Stalker, Corruptor, Mastermind, Dominator, Arachnos Soldier and Arachnos Widow.

Nerouyn wrote: »

Especially when PUg'ing, every time you did group content that experience was fresh because the powers of others in your group were so variable.

Also, there were immersive and meaningful power interactions.

Ehhh... I don't recall much of that.

I remember most group content was Tanker Dumpster Farming (Whereby a Tanker with maxxed defences + resistances ran around and pulled the entire map and then jumped into a dumpster so all the enemies would group up trying to get line of sight on them and then everyone dumped AoEs onto the whole map worth of enemies)

While more difficult content tended to have people err towards certain setups, like Stone Tanker and having a Defender/Corruptor/Controller with Radiation Emission powerset for perma-Accelerate Metabolism. Beyond that it was mostly just looks especially given how similar most of a classes powersets were.

With power interactions not being a thing as far as I remember, outside of specifically Oil Slick Arrow.

I'm not sure if I can recall an MMO that did any sort of meaningful skill interactions between players (I'd fathon a guess and say the reason they don't do this is so that you don't feel obligated to only team with the classes that synergize with your class).

Nerouyn

Taril wrote: »

Well... Archetype was simply another name for class.

I wouldn't start a lynch mob and set your house on fire for claiming that, but I do disagree.

At least that I'm aware of, no other game has done anything similar so I use their "archetype" label and explain when discussing it for the sake of people who haven't played.

Sorry for missing scrapper. I never play melee...

Like classes, your archetype choice locks you into a role and locks you out of a large number of abilities, but the degree of freedom it offers with the choice of primary and secondary powersets is enormous.

I strongly prefer classless games and was very keen on the idea of Champions Online when it was first announced for promising that, but think that CoH is legitimately a cut above class based games.

Taril wrote: »

Ehhh... I don't recall much of that.

It might have been much more noticeable to me as a controller than you as a scrapper. You would have been up close and personal whacking everything regardless of the group composition.

Squishy little me would have been strategically staying back on most my characters, and making different choices of what powers to use and how to use them, depending on what other power sets were in the team.

Not all interactions were positive.

eg. if other players on the team were using any of the various slip down control abilities, then me using any immobilize - group or single target - would make those enemies immune to the slip down. Big no no.

Taril wrote: »

I remember most group content was Tanker Dumpster Farming (Whereby a Tanker with maxxed defences + resistances ran around and pulled the entire map and then jumped into a dumpster so all the enemies would group up trying to get line of sight on them and then everyone dumped AoEs onto the whole map worth of enemies)

I remember that but also it not lasting very long.

The devs were reasonably quick to cap both the number of enemies which could be taunted and also hit with aoe damage abilities.

Taril wrote: »

While more difficult content tended to have people err towards certain setups, like Stone Tanker and having a Defender/Corruptor/Controller with Radiation Emission powerset for perma-Accelerate Metabolism. Beyond that it was mostly just looks especially given how similar most of a classes powersets were.

The stone tank only phase also didn't last forever.

I remember a time when they were rightly regarded as OP and super popular, but the devs changed stuff and other tank types stopped being afraid to show their faces.

Taril wrote: »

With power interactions not being a thing as far as I remember, outside of specifically Oil Slick Arrow.

Nope.

That was the most obvious and often used one but there were others. Like the one I described.

I almost never saw anyone else doing the tornado for damage trick because everyone was ingrained to think never-use-tornado-in-pve but that was one of those rare combos you could do yourself, as a storm / anything controller.

Another common one was I think both fire tanks and tech blasters had an ability which created a small patch of fire on the ground, which did heavy damage per tick but believably made enemies run out of it quickly. So the total damage caused was typically negligible and it was effectively a small fear field.

Unless a controller immobilized enemies in it. As with the tornado that effectively converted a control type ability into an epic damage one.

Taril wrote: »

I'm not sure if I can recall an MMO that did any sort of meaningful skill interactions between players (I'd fathon a guess and say the reason they don't do this is so that you don't feel obligated to only team with the classes that synergize with your class).

I've tried most and can't think of any either except for CoH.

I don't know why. It was great, and as I said, enhanced the game's long term replay ability because of how much variety it introduced into group content. At least for some like me.

Taril

Yes

Nerouyn wrote: »

I wouldn't start a lynch mob and set your house on fire for claiming that, but I do disagree.

At least that I'm aware of, no other game has done anything similar so I use their "archetype" label and explain when discussing it for the sake of people who haven't played.

No game has done the same thing. But Rift did the flexible class system.

In Rift each of the 4 classes has 8 subclasses. You can pick any 3 subclasses to use at a time and put points into any of those 3 to gain talents and abilities.

You can also change these pretty easily, so you can always experiment and adapt.

Nerouyn wrote: »

It might have been much more noticeable to me as a controller than you as a scrapper. You would have been up close and personal whacking everything regardless of the group composition.

I played more than Scrapper. I quite enjoyed my many Masterminds, Controllers, and my Warshade + Arachnos Soldier.

For the most part, every Blaster did the same thing. Every Scrapper did the same thing. Every Controller did the same thing. It was only small amounts of flavour that changed between powersets, outside specific ones that were notably different (Like Stone Armor having Granite Armor for easy resists and Radiation Emission having Accelerate Metabolism)

Nerouyn wrote: »

I remember that but also it not lasting very long.

It lasted until the day the game shut down. It probably still exists on the unofficial fan servers that are currently active.

The nerfs affected it, but it was still the most effective strategy.

Nerouyn wrote: »

The stone tank only phase also didn't last forever.

I remember a time when they were rightly regarded as OP and super popular, but the devs changed stuff and other tank types stopped being afraid to show their faces.

Stone Tanker was always the preferred choice. Even with Stone Bruisers existing.

Other tanks were viable, but Stone Tanker was always the number 1 choice. Mostly because it was a safe choice due to Granite providing most of the stats where other options relied more on expensive set enhancements to fill out their resistances/defences so you usually knew that Stoners were likely to be actually decent tanks.

Nerouyn wrote: »

Another common one was I think both fire tanks and tech blasters had an ability which created a small patch of fire on the ground, which did heavy damage per tick but believably made enemies run out of it quickly. So the total damage caused was typically negligible and it was effectively a small fear field.

Unless a controller immobilized enemies in it. As with the tornado that effectively converted a control type ability into an epic damage one.

All this is not particularly noteworthy "Skill interactions"

It's a common mechanic among games to have immobilizes prevent enemies moving out of AoE's and often being immune to CC effects that move (Heck, in ESO you can immobilize enemies to prevent them wandering around and being knocked all over...)

The only thing that really prevents it from being a core mechanic is most games shy away from the stupid annoying mechanics that move enemies around needlessly, at least on core combat skills (Also, sadly they also move away from having any use for crowd control in general and favour "Smash your face onto your damage abilities" gameplay)

Nerouyn

Taril wrote: »

No game has done the same thing. But Rift did the flexible class system.

In Rift each of the 4 classes has 8 subclasses. You can pick any 3 subclasses to use at a time and put points into any of those 3 to gain talents and abilities.

You can also change these pretty easily, so you can always experiment and adapt.

Yeah I really liked that about Rift in theory but in practice the result isn't what I'd call fun, and why macro-ing is not only allowed but regarded by many as essential in that game.

Taril wrote: »

I played more than Scrapper. I quite enjoyed my many Masterminds, Controllers, and my Warshade + Arachnos Soldier.

For the most part, every Blaster did the same thing. Every Scrapper did the same thing. Every Controller did the same thing. It was only small amounts of flavour that changed between powersets, outside specific ones that were notably different (Like Stone Armor having Granite Armor for easy resists and Radiation Emission having Accelerate Metabolism)

Really no.

Even not taking into account secondary powersets, the primary controller powersets were all worlds apart.

Most but not all sets had an aoe hold, with a very long cooldown.

Most but not all sets had an aoe immobilize.

About half had an aoe disorient.

All but mind had perma summonable damage pets, and those pets were mostly wildly different not just in appearance but in how they played.

Illusion only had summonable tank pets, but courtesy of its duration and cooldown couldn't be perma'ed.

Ice and stone had an aoe slip down.

Illusion and gravity were the only sets with a proper damage ability.

Most played semi similarly insofar as you tried to always have some kind of aoe control ability ready for the beginning of every new fight, except for illusion and mind.

Like the storm pool's tornado ability, many players regarded mind controllers as only good for pvp. It was very rare to see them in pve and some of their abilities like the aoe confuse were often not welcome, because the damage enemies did to each other effectively translated to less xp.

Then there's secondary sets.

Kinetics as a secondary turns you into a buff powerhouse and can seriously let you function as a one hero team.

Back before we moved to WoW, my SG (aka guild) would just follow me around and let my imps obliterate everything, because there was no point in their trying to contribute.

Storm gives you more control and tornado for damage using the interaction I previously described.

Empathy gives you the game's best heals so if your control fails for any reason, it's the ultimate backup. Many teams preferred having at least one emp, but over time players came to understand that other defense sets were perfectly viable.

etc etc.

Each combination thereof is a very different experience both solo and in groups.

Taril wrote: »

It lasted until the day the game shut down. It probably still exists on the unofficial fan servers that are currently active.

The nerfs affected it, but it was still the most effective strategy.

No I know that you're wrong about this.

It was a hugely controversial change.

I remember doing those pull the whole map runs as a controller. Until the devs capped aoe taunts and damage.

Don't have to take my word for it. These are the patch notes, August 2005.

https://cityofheroes.fandom.com/wiki/Issue_5#Aggro_Cap

The game shut down in 2012.

Taril wrote: »

Stone Tanker was always the preferred choice. Even with Stone Bruisers existing.

Again, no you misremember.

I recall the time when anyone other than a stone tank was treated as unwelcome on a team and why, but the devs responded to that appropriately with very effective changes.

I PUG'ed a lot in that game and mostly as controllers. The type of tank was something I had to adjust my playstyle to.

Taril wrote: »

All this is not particularly noteworthy "Skill interactions"

It's a common mechanic among games to have immobilizes prevent enemies moving out of AoE's and often being immune to CC effects that move (Heck, in ESO you can immobilize enemies to prevent them wandering around and being knocked all over...)

While the complexity of those interactions is ultra basic, they're noteworthy for two obvious reasons.

Most games have no interaction at all, and the effect of those interactions in CoH improved the game's enjoyability and longevity. At least for some players like me, if not yourself.

I'd love to see games take that basic idea and build on it.

Taril

Yes

Nerouyn wrote: »

Yeah I really liked that about Rift in theory but in practice the result isn't what I'd call fun, and why macro-ing is not only allowed but regarded by many as essential in that game.

I found it fun. It was fun to mix and match and come up with interesting combinations for a particular result. My only qualm was the overall lack of healer and tank subclasses which made most of the builds for those roles "Max out the 1 subclass you have for it and put you last 5 points into whatever"

I dunno what you mean about macros. I never used them nor heard about them. But I guess I left the game before any meaningful endgame content was introduced (Many months of farming the same Rifts and Dungeons was only so exciting...)

Nerouyn wrote: »

Really no.

Really, yes.

ALL Blasters Blasted. They all got the same core set up of small short cooldown attack, medium moderate cooldown attack, large long cooldown attack. They all got their big AoE that crippled their endurance etc.

ALL Scrappers scrapped. They all got the same core set up of small short cooldown attack, medium moderate cooldown attack, large long cooldown attack.

ALL Stalkers sucked. Since they were basically just bad Scrappers because their gimmick of stealth and their stealth ambush attack replaced a better skill (With the whole stealth thing being useless in group content)

ALL Masterminds got their 3 small pets, 2 medium pets and 1 big strong pet and their 2 pet buff skills.

There would be some minor differences between powersets, a unique skill here, some different debuffs there.

The major differences were mostly found in the Control and Support powersets. Many of the Control powersets were more drastically different (With things like Mind Control and Illusion Control being more single target focused control. Illision also being the most damaging with its single target attack and strong damaging pet) with Support powersets often also having differences (With Empathy/Pain Domination being the primary heal powersets while Posion and Trick Arrow were more about debuffing enemies)

Which is likely where your memories come from as seemingly a primarily Controller player, you were the class that had the most diversity what with using Control primaries and Support secondaries.

Every other class was much less involved. With only Corruptor, Defender, Dominator and Mastermind being the only classes that also utilized either a Control or Support powerset (Corruptor, Defender and Mastermind used Support powersets. Dominator used Control powerset)

Nerouyn wrote: »

No I know that you're wrong about this.

I know it was changed. But I also know that I WAS LITERALLY DOING TANKER DUMPSTER FARMING UNTIL THE DAY THE SERVERS SHUT DOWN.

Many other classes trying to do it generally were foiled by the change. But the whole thing was that Tankers doing it could simply live long enough for the extra time that it took to AoE down all the enemies (Made even longer since Blasters were no longer insta-clearing the entire map with their big AoE nuke skill, which made the skill useless) to still make it possible.

The cap on taunts and AoE targets didn't ultimately matter. People just wouldn't do anything while the Tanker was gathering everything up (So enemies just attacked the Tanker because it was the only target) and when everyone dropped AoEs, if a non-taunted enemy was hit... It was blown up by stacked AoE damage before it did anything.

The only farming change that actually killed a particular farming method, was the change to the Mission Architect to adjust experience gains based on your actual level, not the level you were sidekicked up to (Which was due to the popularity of creating a level 53 map of the easiest enemies in the game and them you sidekicked up to level 47 when you entered and got exp as if you were a level 47 killing level 53 enemies even if you were a level 1 pleb - Allowing you to power level up to level 50 in less than an hour)

Nerouyn wrote: »

I recall the time when anyone other than a stone tank was treated as unwelcome on a team and why, but the devs responded to that appropriately with very effective changes.

I'm not talking about other tanks being "Unwelcome". I'm talking about Stone being preferred.

People took whatever tanks they got. Be it Stone Tanker or otherwise. But often people simply preferred having a Stone Tanker.

Even towards the end of the game's life, I still saw more Stone Tankers than anything else.

Nerouyn wrote: »

I'd love to see games take that basic idea and build on it.

I think the issue mostly stems from creating equality between classes. Which is a thing that many games look for (Notably after WoW's shift in that direction. The whole "Bring the player not the class" ideology)

Creating specific synergies generally means requiring specific classes (Or in the case of a more flexible class system, specific skill sets) which is not good for the old Jolly Co-operation.

Attempts to make more homogenized skill synergies simply ends up with ESO style "Press X at now" stuff.

It's really hard to make any sort of inter-character synergies work in an MMO, especially when you start getting hardcore endgame content and people that min-max things so they WILL be specifically building teams around exploiting the synergies and so if your class doesn't fit in you won't get picked.

It gets even harder the more flexible you make classes, since at least with strict classes you can have set skills within a particular role so then all classes within that role can provide the same synergy. If people have more freedom then there's less chance that everyone in a particular role are going to have any shared skills (Until the min-maxers determine the BiS skillsets for everyone and their cat to run)

Nerouyn

Taril wrote: »

I found it fun. It was fun to mix and match and come up with interesting combinations for a particular result. My only qualm was the overall lack of healer and tank subclasses which made most of the builds for those roles "Max out the 1 subclass you have for it and put you last 5 points into whatever"

I dunno what you mean about macros. I never used them nor heard about them. But I guess I left the game before any meaningful endgame content was introduced (Many months of farming the same Rifts and Dungeons was only so exciting...)

This is reaching far back into history for me but as I recall, the macro phenomenon is something I only noticed in later visits and affected some callings (i.e. roles) much more than others.

My earlier visits I think I mostly played bard and it was mages and clerics who were worst affected. That's because mages and clerics use the typical mana / magicka resource system and rogues (in which bards are) the standard (eg. WoW) builder / consumer mechanic.

The freedom of being able to mix classes and go as deep or not into any of their skill trees as you liked was truly great but the result especially on mages and clerics is that it created many-many-many-many buttoned optimal rotations for every single fight.

That's why the game supported macros. To reduce those many-many-many-many button presses down to just many.

https://telarapedia.fandom.com/wiki/Macro

As I recall the fifth, primalist calling was an attempt to combat this criticism, which has much shorter skill trees and so far, far, far fewer abilities in total.

Taril wrote: »

The major differences were mostly found in the Control and Support powersets.

Yeah, ok, I think have to concede this point.

Thinking back, perhaps that's one reason why I preferred controllers.

Taril wrote: »

I know it was changed. But I also know that I WAS LITERALLY DOING TANKER DUMPSTER FARMING UNTIL THE DAY THE SERVERS SHUT DOWN.

I'm stunned. Post that change I literally never saw that again.

What would be the point?

If damage dealers can only hit 16 at a time, how would farming that way be worth the effort?

Taril wrote: »

I think the issue mostly stems from creating equality between classes. Which is a thing that many games look for (Notably after WoW's shift in that direction. The whole "Bring the player not the class" ideology)

Creating specific synergies generally means requiring specific classes (Or in the case of a more flexible class system, specific skill sets) which is not good for the old Jolly Co-operation.

Many games, including ESO specifically reward class diversity within groups.

eg. Sorcerer passive exploitation.

When you cast a Dark Magic ability you grant Minor Prophecy to you and your group, increasing your Spell Critical rating by 1314 for 20 seconds.

Ditto for every other class in this game except Necromancer. Perhaps their unique ability to group resurrect is regarded as an awesome enough advantage?

Taril

Yes

Nerouyn wrote: »

The freedom of being able to mix classes and go as deep or not into any of their skill trees as you liked was truly great but the result especially on mages and clerics is that it created many-many-many-many buttoned optimal rotations for every single fight.

I still find that result surprising. Given my own experiences.

Since there was always the base limitation of what you can do within a GCD (I.e. You can only use 1 skill at a time. It doesn't matter if you have 1000000 skills, you can only use one per GCD). Usually there was simply an optimal skill to use for most scenarios.

I.e. For Rogues, with their combo generators and spenders... You typically had 1 "Best" generator which you spammed and then maybe 2-3 spenders that were worth using (I.e. 2 buff/debuff spenders and then 1 damage/healing spender)

The fact that skills were obtained via talent point spendage meant that you didn't access more skills than any other typical MMO set up, just that you had more flexibility in which ones you had (Throw in the fact that you were still subject to the actual talents you picked, which would generally mean specific skills gain extra value making them more lucrative to use)

Nerouyn wrote: »

That's why the game supported macros.

To be fair, many games support macros. They're not always necessary. Like, WoW has had one of the more comprehensive Macro systems forever, but even in its heyday of ability bloat (Back before the "Great Pruning" because according to balance team "People are too stupid to track 5 DoTs") they were rarely necessary outside of specifically Warrior PvP (Whereby macros to change equipped weapons in order to use certain skills like Spell Reflect and Shield Wall and then swap back to your 2 handed weapon were required)

FFXIV also supports macros, but again they've never been necessary (Though, its macro system is more limited... Probably intentionally given that the game is so incredibly scripted that a half decent macro system could let you play an entire Raid from start to finish with a single button press. Like, not repeatedly pressing the button, just step into the raid, press 1 button then go watch TV for a couple of hours and come back to a perfect run completion)

Nerouyn wrote: »

What would be the point?

If damage dealers can only hit 16 at a time, how would farming that way be worth the effort?

Efficiency. Instead of running from pack to pack, attacking a handful of enemies at a time you consolidate everything. You just sit there spamming all your AoE's and you're ALWAYS hittting 16 enemies. Meaning you're always doing peak damage.

Nerouyn wrote: »

Many games, including ESO specifically reward class diversity within groups.

Which normally just results in a single token inclusion of a particularly less desired class simply for its unique benefit. While the actually desired classes get stacked.

Like, just look at logs for endgame PvE content. DPS is literally all just Arcanist and then 1 token Sorc and 1 token DK. While having 1 Warden (Typically healer, but can also be Tank).

Nerouyn

Taril wrote: »

I still find that result surprising. Given my own experiences.

As I said, I only experienced it myself on later visits and it varied by calling.

For clerics and mages on a standard mana / magicka resource and cooldown system, the massive number of skills players ended up with required long and complicated (by MMO norms) rotations that didn't literally "require" macros, but close to.

Think a typical number of big damage attacks, dots, buffs, debuffs etc. etc. all on long cooldowns like you would for any similar class based MMO and multiply by three or four.

Most MMOs don't support macros. In many they're officially regarded as cheating.

Rift officially supports them and they're part of the game client for a good reason.

The rogue combo generator / consumer set up means that even with a gazillion and one skill abilities, what you end up with on your hotbar isn't a huge collection of abilities with long cooldowns and a clearly optimal rotation. It's a few big cooldown ones and mostly generators / consumers offering more flexibility to respond to whatever you need.

Also the mage / cleric problem is necessarily exacerbated by level as you acquire more skills. At lower levels it's not there.

And the fifth added primalist calling has much, much, much shorter skill trees in answer to this criticism.

Taril wrote: »

Efficiency. Instead of running from pack to pack, attacking a handful of enemies at a time you consolidate everything. You just sit there spamming all your AoE's and you're ALWAYS hittting 16 enemies. Meaning you're always doing peak damage.

I'll take your word for it that you did it. It would have been possible.

But I never saw it again post that change. Every group I played in simply wiped out enemies as we found them.

The only exception would be small groups either on the streets or instanced missions, and sometimes the tank would draw a few small nearby groups together to take better advantage of the 16 aoe cap.

Taril wrote: »

Which normally just results in a single token inclusion of a particularly less desired class simply for its unique benefit. While the actually desired classes get stacked.

I didn't argue that it was effective.

I counter-argued your argument that devs don't do class combos because they don't want to make any class seem too necessary.

ESO's class specific passive buffs have similar counterparts in many games, though most being more WOW-like, those tend to take the form of actively applied long duration buffs and uniquely useful abilities.

Taril

Yes

Nerouyn wrote: »

[I counter-argued your argument that devs don't do class combos because they don't want to make any class seem too necessary.

Most MMO's don't do these class specific buffs. ESO is more of an outlier in that it actually does in fact try and promote class uniqueness.

Like, I know WoW and FFXIV USED to have some class uniqueness (Such as Bloodlust on Shamans and Bards buffs respectively) but they have since gone away from that.

Outside of those, I can't think of another MMO besides ESO that actually does try to push specific classes by way of unique buffs/debuffs/effects.

Most games simply have each role provide similar tools, so any combination of individual classes function so long as the roles required are being covered.

You'd have to provide more examples of games that do this sort of thing to really convince me.

Quethrosar

we should only be able to cast magic missile 5 times a day at level 50 !

Nerouyn

Taril wrote: »

Most MMO's don't do these class specific buffs. ESO is more of an outlier in that it actually does in fact try and promote class uniqueness.

Like, I know WoW and FFXIV USED to have some class uniqueness (Such as Bloodlust on Shamans and Bards buffs respectively) but they have since gone away from that.

Most of the MMOs I've played did, and that's most of them.

WOW definitely had them originally. Hour (or two)) long class specific buffs that also meant that throwing a buff on random players you passed was worth doing.

I've not played for a long time.

Taril wrote: »

Outside of those, I can't think of another MMO besides ESO that actually does try to push specific classes by way of unique buffs/debuffs/effects.

Anarchy Online. Lots of classes and probably nearly or all of them with class specific buffs like this.

Beyond that I can't specifically remember any because most were WoW clones too similar to the original to make a mark.

Except for GW2 - another NCSoft game like CoH which has class combos.

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Combo

Regardless, we know that ESO actively promotes class diversity in groups so this can't be the reason for the lack of a more interesting combo system.

Additionally, combos could but wouldn't need to be class based.

The weird single / aoe / tank buffs now attached to destruction staves to promote weapon diversity in all content could be replaced with a more interesting combo system, and like some of the CoH combos, some would be accessible solo.

Example:

Fire magic on an ice aoe patch (and vice versa) --> water patch. Maybe slippery.

Fire magic on a water patch --> steam. Shorter, faster DoT.

Fire magic on a shock patch (and vice versa) --> not so obvious. Maybe poison and / or asphyxiation as in it superheats the air enough to burn off all of the oxygen and / or leave noxious gas.

Shock magic on a water patch --> aoe insta damage everything in the water.

Shock magic on an ice patch --> not so obvious. Didn't know but checked and ice is still conductive but less so than water. So maybe it stores the shock damage like a sorc daedric trap for the next enemy to step on it.

Ice magic on a water patch --> bigger (than base frost) ice patch.

Physical weapons being well, physical and boring, combos just between those would require more creativity but aren't impossibe, eg. one player throwing a knife and another player redirecting it to the enemy for heightened damage.

Also maybe weapon self buffs could be combo'ed to add that destruction damage type.

Amottica

Nerouyn wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

In ESO a "rotation" is not about building procs to make specific skills hit harder since it is about the timing of skills coming off cooldown/DoT needs to be refreshed.

I think it's extremely telling that you said this.

ESO doesn't have cooldowns.

Personally I can't stand games with cooldowns and the mindless repetition of rotations they necessitate and while ESO doesn't have cooldowns (other than on set procs), its combat nevertheless devolves into the same style of mindless repetition of rotations.

It's one of the reasons I don't play group content in this game.

The other is "mechanics".

I haven't heard the term "toolbox combat" before but it sounds like they're describing content where player abilities are what beat bosses, not memorizing paths through mazes like rats.

Yes please.

I am used to an add-on that lets me know when a skill can be refreshed. It is like a CD.

Granted, I do not think the idea of "toolbox combat" is explained well since we already have skills that buff the group and debuff the boss to improve the group's performance. Off balance is a great example that fits the OP's requirements.

A well-coordinated group will have what they need to increase their effectiveness.

Taril

Yes

Nerouyn wrote: »

Most of the MMOs I've played did, and that's most of them.

Again, I'd need citations. Since I've played most MMO's and have not seen this.

Nerouyn wrote: »

WOW definitely had them originally. Hour (or two)) long class specific buffs that also meant that throwing a buff on random players you passed was worth doing.

Yes, I mentioned that. WoW originally had things unique to classes (They even had things unique to faction back in the day, with Paladin being Alliance only and Shaman being Horde only)

They have LONG since gone away from that. Firstly with The Burning Crusade the removed the faction divide with Blood Elves enabling Horde to access the Paladin class and Draenei enabling the Alliance to access the Shaman class. Then with the second expansion Wrath of the Lich King they removed all class unique buffs and enabled multiple classes to bring each buff such as Mark of the Wild from Druids providing the same stat buff as Blessing of Kings from Paladin. As well as providing more sources for unique cooldowns like Bloodlust/Heroism from Shaman also being available as Time Warp from Mages or from the Hunter's Core Hound pet (I can't remember the name because no-one used it because Shamans and Mages were almost always in a raid)

Nerouyn wrote: »

Anarchy Online. Lots of classes and probably nearly or all of them with class specific buffs like this.

Most of which were irrelevant for combat. These unique buffs were simply used to boost stats to equip gear. Actual combat in AO was devoid of class focus besides "Tank" being an Enforcer/Soldier/Adventurer in the most difficult content (Outside of that you could get away with Engineer, Crat, MP, Fixer, Keeper, Doc or even an Agent who became an Enf/Sol/Adv - If you even needed a tank and couldn't just kite everything like is done in the popular Heckler farming)

Nerouyn wrote: »

Except for GW2 - another NCSoft game like CoH which has class combos.

These aren't "Class" combos. They're generic combos. It's simply providing a field and an activator. Which various classes can do.

Never mind the fact that they're the most boring of any sort of "Combo" mechanic... It's simply a matter of slapping down your AoE skill that you are doing anyway because it's a skill that does something you want in the first place while everyone stacks inside of it spamming all their skills that they would anyway, only now they get bonuses on top of the regular skill effect.

Ironically, GW2's combo system is more interesting outside of group content. Namely revolving around Thief's use of its Smoke fields to enter stealth to be an annoying hit and run class (Similar to NB here in ESO)

Nerouyn wrote: »

Regardless, we know that ESO actively promotes class diversity in groups so this can't be the reason for the lack of a more interesting combo system.

Other than the fact that promoting combos can often directly interfere with class diversity by promoting class stacking?

Of course, ESO isn't particularly noteworthy in discouraging class stacking given its current state (Which is dominated by StamArc for DPS with a token Sorc and DK for the "Diversity" quota via providing unique buffs/debuffs)

Nerouyn wrote: »

Additionally, combos could but wouldn't need to be class based.

The weird single / aoe / tank buffs now attached to destruction staves to promote weapon diversity in all content could be replaced with a more interesting combo system, and like some of the CoH combos, some would be accessible solo.

The issue is trying to make these actually interesting and engaging and not simply fall into the same gameplay pattern as ESO currently has where you just swap to your backbar, drop a couple of buffs/DoTs and then go back to your main bar and spam your actual skills. Or in the case of your comment about physical weapons, simply another form of "Press X at now" style "Combo"

You might improve some item diversity, so that maybe Dual Wield isn't the end-all-be-all of DPS (With the back bar being 2h/inferno staff for DoT application), but the core gameplay would remain largely the same.

Which are the overarching problems with trying to create combo systems in the first place. Trying to find a mechanic that actually has some level of depth while retaining overall balance.

Like, it's easy to come up with different iterations of combo systems, but a lot of them simply devolve into some sort of "Press X at now" thing.

GW2's combos do this (You press your skill while inside the field), Dragon Age: Inquisition's combos do this (Use your finisher skill while the opponent has a status effect on them), CoH's "Combos" do this (Use your AoE damage skill while the enemy is immobilized) etc.

Combos are simply hard to do in an interesting way outside of tactical games where action economy is limited so that setting up and performing combos has more weight. Where you're not spamming out "Rotations" and various abilities constantly and have to actively decide when and how to use abilities.

Nihilr

Yes

Toolbox style would be relevant if the went back to Fire damage --> more effective on ice creatures, Ice Damage --> more effective on Fire creatures, Shock against magic, Etc.

Also, if classes were disbanded and you could choose 2 (instead of 3) class skill lines, or a total of 10 skills and 8 passives from any class--so that combinations could allow for more variations rather than pitted into "classes".

This would be neat, and I know people always argue that players will pick the same 10 skills for "BiS" for dps--but those players will get bored at some point because it's so limiting to play that way.