Animation cancelling isn't intended after all

Nestor

runkorkoeb17_ESO wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

I sat in a room with all the lead devs, combat designers and the game director and we spent an hour discussing Animation Canceling exclusively. We discussed timings and how to make it smoother. You know what was not discussed? Removing AC.

Its not going away. Even if it went away, they would just remove the animations or combat would just be a mess.

Ok.
So how you will aproach the problem with mouse macros and scripters?
We know scripts are not allowed?
What about mouse macros then? Arent they literaly the same/ same final effect?

How would removing Animation Canceling stop this? You don't need a macro to animation cancel, nor does animation Canceling benefit from a macro. Your argument is like removing cars because some people drive too fast.

Spend a few hours to learn how to weave attacks.

idk

LOL. OP thinks they are clever, but not.

We have known AC was not intended. It was an unintended consequence of the lively system to permit us to block, dodge roll, or interrupt when needed since all of those activities are required with a quick response. It is also the product of animations not being standardized to a great degree.

Zos basically said as much with fewer words about 5 years ago when they gave it their blessing as a legitimate part of the game. So no new news here. Nothing of value to see.

Nestor

9

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

I sat in a room with all the lead devs, combat designers and the game director and we spent an hour discussing Animation Canceling exclusively. We discussed timings and how to make it smoother. You know what was not discussed? Removing AC.

Its not going away. Even if it went away, they would just remove the animations or combat would just be a mess.

This just tells me that you're a bad "Community Ambassador", otherwise you would have brought it up, since obviously a lot of people disagree.

Or it tells me your unwilling to learn how to do animation cancelling.

And, by far, more people like AC or don't care than don't like AC. Because most people realize how bad turn based combat in a real time game is.

Go ahead try it, apply a skill, do a One One Thousand, apply a light attack and apply a skill again. Tell me how much fun that is. And, if you think AC sucks, just wait until you have to wait and time the application of the next skill to coincide with the end of the animation of the previous skill.

And, you know what, the players who are left will learn how to do that and they will keep cleaning your clock in PvP. Because you would still refuse to learn how to apply your skills and they will spend the time to apply skills to be as efficient and effective as the combat system allows.

Besides, since combat would be slowed to a crawl, the devs would just remove or shorten all animations so the game would end up playing like Starcraft does in a game bang.

Jeremy

MaleAmazon wrote: »

ZOS literally can't figure out how to get rid of it or fix it

Yes they can. Stop spreading lies please.

In order to fix it they would probably have to abandon reactive blocking and dodging, which is a pretty substantial element of this game's combat system. So I'm going to have to defer here and say he's most likely right. It would be pretty difficult to fix and would probably require molding an entirely new combat system.

What they shouldn't do though is embrace the glitch and then actually design content around expecting players to use it.

Katahdin

None of this matters

The devs have said it's unintended but it's a thing.
They encourage use of weaving, animation cancelling and want people using it.

IT IS NOT GOING AWAY
DEAL WITH IT


/rant

Jeremy

Katahdin wrote: »

None of this matters

The devs have said it's unintended but it's a thing.
They encourage use of weaving, animation cancelling and want people using it.

IT IS NOT GOING AWAY
DEAL WITH IT


/rant

Light Attack Weaving is fine and should be encouraged. But wanting people to cancel their skill animations by blocking air so they can use moves faster is just stupid and that should not be encouraged by the developers. I should also note Wrobel is no longer in charge. So just because he encouraged it - that doesn't necessarily mean this new team is.

ZeroXFF

Nestor wrote: »

9

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

I sat in a room with all the lead devs, combat designers and the game director and we spent an hour discussing Animation Canceling exclusively. We discussed timings and how to make it smoother. You know what was not discussed? Removing AC.

Its not going away. Even if it went away, they would just remove the animations or combat would just be a mess.

This just tells me that you're a bad "Community Ambassador", otherwise you would have brought it up, since obviously a lot of people disagree.

Or it tells me your unwilling to learn how to do animation cancelling.

And, by far, more people like AC or don't care than don't like AC. Because most people realize how bad turn based combat in a real time game is.

Go ahead try it, apply a skill, do a One One Thousand, apply a light attack and apply a skill again. Tell me how much fun that is. And, if you think AC sucks, just wait until you have to wait and time the application of the next skill to coincide with the end of the animation of the previous skill.

And, you know what, the players who are left will learn how to do that and they will keep cleaning your clock in PvP. Because you would still refuse to learn how to apply your skills and they will spend the time to apply skills to be as efficient and effective as the combat system allows.

Besides, since combat would be slowed to a crawl, the devs would just remove or shorten all animations so the game would end up playing like Starcraft does in a game bang.

If you call using skills that are on a GCD "turn based combat", then ESO already has "turn based combat", you just can perform 2 actions per turn instead of one, which how exactly isn't closer to Starcraft than my proposal? You're contradicting yourself in the same message by presenting a scenario that you consider desirable and then saying it's not desirable at the same time.

And yeah, most people like AC, me included. I just don't like that one aspect of it that we call "light attack weaving". So yeah, you're right, most people like AC, but among the people who you put in the category of "liking AC" there are plenty who sure as hell are not on your side on this. And going beyond that I would like to point you towards the wikipedia article about survivorship bias. Multiple people that I tried to introduce to the game have quit because of it, that's voices you'll never get to hear. Not to mention the fact that on the forums you see the people most involved with the game, and not so much the casuals who just play the game, oblivious to the existence of this "mechanic" in the first place.

Also, it's irrelevant whether or not I want to learn AC (spoiler alert: I do it all the time). I know you just wanted to use some witty comeback after I stated the obvious that hit too close to home for you, but the fact is, if you want to be a good representative, you have to mention all concerns, not just those of the majority, put them in the right context, and fairly represent the arguments being made. You did not do that, ergo, bad community ambassador.

Jeremy

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

9

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

I sat in a room with all the lead devs, combat designers and the game director and we spent an hour discussing Animation Canceling exclusively. We discussed timings and how to make it smoother. You know what was not discussed? Removing AC.

Its not going away. Even if it went away, they would just remove the animations or combat would just be a mess.

This just tells me that you're a bad "Community Ambassador", otherwise you would have brought it up, since obviously a lot of people disagree.

Or it tells me your unwilling to learn how to do animation cancelling.

And, by far, more people like AC or don't care than don't like AC. Because most people realize how bad turn based combat in a real time game is.

Go ahead try it, apply a skill, do a One One Thousand, apply a light attack and apply a skill again. Tell me how much fun that is. And, if you think AC sucks, just wait until you have to wait and time the application of the next skill to coincide with the end of the animation of the previous skill.

And, you know what, the players who are left will learn how to do that and they will keep cleaning your clock in PvP. Because you would still refuse to learn how to apply your skills and they will spend the time to apply skills to be as efficient and effective as the combat system allows.

Besides, since combat would be slowed to a crawl, the devs would just remove or shorten all animations so the game would end up playing like Starcraft does in a game bang.

If you call using skills that are on a GCD "turn based combat", then ESO already has "turn based combat", you just can perform 2 actions per turn instead of one, which how exactly isn't closer to Starcraft than my proposal? You're contradicting yourself in the same message by presenting a scenario that you consider desirable and then saying it's not desirable at the same time.

And yeah, most people like AC, me included. I just don't like that one aspect of it that we call "light attack weaving". So yeah, you're right, most people like AC, but among the people who you put in the category of "liking AC" there are plenty who sure as hell are not on your side on this. And going beyond that I would like to point you towards the wikipedia article about survivorship bias. Multiple people that I tried to introduce to the game have quit because of it, that's voices you'll never get to hear. Not to mention the fact that on the forums you see the people most involved with the game, and not so much the casuals who just play the game, oblivious to the existence of this "mechanic" in the first place.

Also, it's irrelevant whether or not I want to learn AC (spoiler alert: I do it all the time). I know you just wanted to use some witty comeback after I stated the obvious that hit too close to home for you, but the fact is, if you want to be a good representative, you have to mention all concerns, not just those of the majority, put them in the right context, and fairly represent the arguments being made. You did not do that, ergo, bad community ambassador.

What would be the point of Light Attacks to begin with if not to weave between your skills?

ZeroXFF

Jeremy wrote: »

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

9

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

I sat in a room with all the lead devs, combat designers and the game director and we spent an hour discussing Animation Canceling exclusively. We discussed timings and how to make it smoother. You know what was not discussed? Removing AC.

Its not going away. Even if it went away, they would just remove the animations or combat would just be a mess.

This just tells me that you're a bad "Community Ambassador", otherwise you would have brought it up, since obviously a lot of people disagree.

Or it tells me your unwilling to learn how to do animation cancelling.

And, by far, more people like AC or don't care than don't like AC. Because most people realize how bad turn based combat in a real time game is.

Go ahead try it, apply a skill, do a One One Thousand, apply a light attack and apply a skill again. Tell me how much fun that is. And, if you think AC sucks, just wait until you have to wait and time the application of the next skill to coincide with the end of the animation of the previous skill.

And, you know what, the players who are left will learn how to do that and they will keep cleaning your clock in PvP. Because you would still refuse to learn how to apply your skills and they will spend the time to apply skills to be as efficient and effective as the combat system allows.

Besides, since combat would be slowed to a crawl, the devs would just remove or shorten all animations so the game would end up playing like Starcraft does in a game bang.

If you call using skills that are on a GCD "turn based combat", then ESO already has "turn based combat", you just can perform 2 actions per turn instead of one, which how exactly isn't closer to Starcraft than my proposal? You're contradicting yourself in the same message by presenting a scenario that you consider desirable and then saying it's not desirable at the same time.

And yeah, most people like AC, me included. I just don't like that one aspect of it that we call "light attack weaving". So yeah, you're right, most people like AC, but among the people who you put in the category of "liking AC" there are plenty who sure as hell are not on your side on this. And going beyond that I would like to point you towards the wikipedia article about survivorship bias. Multiple people that I tried to introduce to the game have quit because of it, that's voices you'll never get to hear. Not to mention the fact that on the forums you see the people most involved with the game, and not so much the casuals who just play the game, oblivious to the existence of this "mechanic" in the first place.

Also, it's irrelevant whether or not I want to learn AC (spoiler alert: I do it all the time). I know you just wanted to use some witty comeback after I stated the obvious that hit too close to home for you, but the fact is, if you want to be a good representative, you have to mention all concerns, not just those of the majority, put them in the right context, and fairly represent the arguments being made. You did not do that, ergo, bad community ambassador.

What would be the point of Light Attacks to begin with if not to weave between your skills?

Using as a free, low damage spammable when you're struggling to keep resources up with a spammable that costs resources.

Jeremy

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

9

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

I sat in a room with all the lead devs, combat designers and the game director and we spent an hour discussing Animation Canceling exclusively. We discussed timings and how to make it smoother. You know what was not discussed? Removing AC.

Its not going away. Even if it went away, they would just remove the animations or combat would just be a mess.

This just tells me that you're a bad "Community Ambassador", otherwise you would have brought it up, since obviously a lot of people disagree.

Or it tells me your unwilling to learn how to do animation cancelling.

And, by far, more people like AC or don't care than don't like AC. Because most people realize how bad turn based combat in a real time game is.

Go ahead try it, apply a skill, do a One One Thousand, apply a light attack and apply a skill again. Tell me how much fun that is. And, if you think AC sucks, just wait until you have to wait and time the application of the next skill to coincide with the end of the animation of the previous skill.

And, you know what, the players who are left will learn how to do that and they will keep cleaning your clock in PvP. Because you would still refuse to learn how to apply your skills and they will spend the time to apply skills to be as efficient and effective as the combat system allows.

Besides, since combat would be slowed to a crawl, the devs would just remove or shorten all animations so the game would end up playing like Starcraft does in a game bang.

If you call using skills that are on a GCD "turn based combat", then ESO already has "turn based combat", you just can perform 2 actions per turn instead of one, which how exactly isn't closer to Starcraft than my proposal? You're contradicting yourself in the same message by presenting a scenario that you consider desirable and then saying it's not desirable at the same time.

And yeah, most people like AC, me included. I just don't like that one aspect of it that we call "light attack weaving". So yeah, you're right, most people like AC, but among the people who you put in the category of "liking AC" there are plenty who sure as hell are not on your side on this. And going beyond that I would like to point you towards the wikipedia article about survivorship bias. Multiple people that I tried to introduce to the game have quit because of it, that's voices you'll never get to hear. Not to mention the fact that on the forums you see the people most involved with the game, and not so much the casuals who just play the game, oblivious to the existence of this "mechanic" in the first place.

Also, it's irrelevant whether or not I want to learn AC (spoiler alert: I do it all the time). I know you just wanted to use some witty comeback after I stated the obvious that hit too close to home for you, but the fact is, if you want to be a good representative, you have to mention all concerns, not just those of the majority, put them in the right context, and fairly represent the arguments being made. You did not do that, ergo, bad community ambassador.

What would be the point of Light Attacks to begin with if not to weave between your skills?

Using as a free, low damage spammable when you're struggling to keep resources up with a spammable that costs resources.

But that's what heavy attacks were designed for - to be used when you are running low on resources. So from a design perspective that doesn't make sense to me because the two would counteract each other if light attacks were meant to be used when you are low on resources as well.

Light Attacks were just ESO's version of the auto attack - which was pretty commonplace in all the MMORPGs at the time. The only difference is they wanted players to have to manually use them in order to give the combat a more interactive and action-based feel.

ZeroXFF

Jeremy wrote: »

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

9

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

I sat in a room with all the lead devs, combat designers and the game director and we spent an hour discussing Animation Canceling exclusively. We discussed timings and how to make it smoother. You know what was not discussed? Removing AC.

Its not going away. Even if it went away, they would just remove the animations or combat would just be a mess.

This just tells me that you're a bad "Community Ambassador", otherwise you would have brought it up, since obviously a lot of people disagree.

Or it tells me your unwilling to learn how to do animation cancelling.

And, by far, more people like AC or don't care than don't like AC. Because most people realize how bad turn based combat in a real time game is.

Go ahead try it, apply a skill, do a One One Thousand, apply a light attack and apply a skill again. Tell me how much fun that is. And, if you think AC sucks, just wait until you have to wait and time the application of the next skill to coincide with the end of the animation of the previous skill.

And, you know what, the players who are left will learn how to do that and they will keep cleaning your clock in PvP. Because you would still refuse to learn how to apply your skills and they will spend the time to apply skills to be as efficient and effective as the combat system allows.

Besides, since combat would be slowed to a crawl, the devs would just remove or shorten all animations so the game would end up playing like Starcraft does in a game bang.

If you call using skills that are on a GCD "turn based combat", then ESO already has "turn based combat", you just can perform 2 actions per turn instead of one, which how exactly isn't closer to Starcraft than my proposal? You're contradicting yourself in the same message by presenting a scenario that you consider desirable and then saying it's not desirable at the same time.

And yeah, most people like AC, me included. I just don't like that one aspect of it that we call "light attack weaving". So yeah, you're right, most people like AC, but among the people who you put in the category of "liking AC" there are plenty who sure as hell are not on your side on this. And going beyond that I would like to point you towards the wikipedia article about survivorship bias. Multiple people that I tried to introduce to the game have quit because of it, that's voices you'll never get to hear. Not to mention the fact that on the forums you see the people most involved with the game, and not so much the casuals who just play the game, oblivious to the existence of this "mechanic" in the first place.

Also, it's irrelevant whether or not I want to learn AC (spoiler alert: I do it all the time). I know you just wanted to use some witty comeback after I stated the obvious that hit too close to home for you, but the fact is, if you want to be a good representative, you have to mention all concerns, not just those of the majority, put them in the right context, and fairly represent the arguments being made. You did not do that, ergo, bad community ambassador.

What would be the point of Light Attacks to begin with if not to weave between your skills?

Using as a free, low damage spammable when you're struggling to keep resources up with a spammable that costs resources.

But that's what heavy attacks were designed for - to be used when you are running low on resources. So from a design perspective that doesn't make sense to me because the two would counteract each other if light attacks were meant to be used when you are low on resources as well.

Light Attacks were just ESO's version of the auto attack - which was pretty commonplace in all the MMORPGs at the time. The only difference is they wanted players to have to manually use them in order to give the combat a more interactive and action-based feel.

Heavy attacks take longer and mess with the rotation. Light attacks would be the mid-level resource management tool, one you use when you're not desperate for resources, but know that you won't last long enough in the "burst mode".

Jeremy

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

9

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

I sat in a room with all the lead devs, combat designers and the game director and we spent an hour discussing Animation Canceling exclusively. We discussed timings and how to make it smoother. You know what was not discussed? Removing AC.

Its not going away. Even if it went away, they would just remove the animations or combat would just be a mess.

This just tells me that you're a bad "Community Ambassador", otherwise you would have brought it up, since obviously a lot of people disagree.

Or it tells me your unwilling to learn how to do animation cancelling.

And, by far, more people like AC or don't care than don't like AC. Because most people realize how bad turn based combat in a real time game is.

Go ahead try it, apply a skill, do a One One Thousand, apply a light attack and apply a skill again. Tell me how much fun that is. And, if you think AC sucks, just wait until you have to wait and time the application of the next skill to coincide with the end of the animation of the previous skill.

And, you know what, the players who are left will learn how to do that and they will keep cleaning your clock in PvP. Because you would still refuse to learn how to apply your skills and they will spend the time to apply skills to be as efficient and effective as the combat system allows.

Besides, since combat would be slowed to a crawl, the devs would just remove or shorten all animations so the game would end up playing like Starcraft does in a game bang.

If you call using skills that are on a GCD "turn based combat", then ESO already has "turn based combat", you just can perform 2 actions per turn instead of one, which how exactly isn't closer to Starcraft than my proposal? You're contradicting yourself in the same message by presenting a scenario that you consider desirable and then saying it's not desirable at the same time.

And yeah, most people like AC, me included. I just don't like that one aspect of it that we call "light attack weaving". So yeah, you're right, most people like AC, but among the people who you put in the category of "liking AC" there are plenty who sure as hell are not on your side on this. And going beyond that I would like to point you towards the wikipedia article about survivorship bias. Multiple people that I tried to introduce to the game have quit because of it, that's voices you'll never get to hear. Not to mention the fact that on the forums you see the people most involved with the game, and not so much the casuals who just play the game, oblivious to the existence of this "mechanic" in the first place.

Also, it's irrelevant whether or not I want to learn AC (spoiler alert: I do it all the time). I know you just wanted to use some witty comeback after I stated the obvious that hit too close to home for you, but the fact is, if you want to be a good representative, you have to mention all concerns, not just those of the majority, put them in the right context, and fairly represent the arguments being made. You did not do that, ergo, bad community ambassador.

What would be the point of Light Attacks to begin with if not to weave between your skills?

Using as a free, low damage spammable when you're struggling to keep resources up with a spammable that costs resources.

But that's what heavy attacks were designed for - to be used when you are running low on resources. So from a design perspective that doesn't make sense to me because the two would counteract each other if light attacks were meant to be used when you are low on resources as well.

Light Attacks were just ESO's version of the auto attack - which was pretty commonplace in all the MMORPGs at the time. The only difference is they wanted players to have to manually use them in order to give the combat a more interactive and action-based feel.

Heavy attacks take longer and mess with the rotation. Light attacks would be the mid-level resource management tool, one you use when you're not desperate for resources, but know that you won't last long enough in the "burst mode".

I see what you're saying now. So to follow up your burst after you are out of resources to finish something off. That's a fair argument. But it doesn't explain the curious absence of an auto attack on ESO when most of the other MMORPGs at the time had them.

It would be nice if someone from the development team could chime in and say once and for all if light attack weaving was intended from the beginning or not. Because my information is it always was - and was simply meant to replace the auto attack function commonly found in other games at the time. They just decided they wanted players to have to manually use them instead of them being automatic to make the combat feel more interactive and action-based.

I should also note that when I weave light attacks into my rotation it doesn't even cancel my animations anyway. The combination appears fluid and smooth to me.

Conduit0

Jeremy wrote: »

In order to fix it they would probably have to abandon reactive blocking and dodging, which is a pretty substantial element of this game's combat system. So I'm going to have to defer here and say he's most likely right. It would be pretty difficult to fix and would probably require molding an entirely new combat system.

What they shouldn't do though is embrace the glitch and then actually design content around expecting players to use it.

Light attack weaving could be eliminated by simply putting light/heavy attacks on the same GCD as abilities.

Jeremy wrote: »

Light Attack Weaving is fine and should be encouraged. But wanting people to cancel their skill animations by blocking air so they can use moves faster is just stupid and that should not be encouraged by the developers. I should also note Wrobel is no longer in charge. So just because he encouraged it - that doesn't necessarily mean this new team is.

If the devs don't want people to block/barswap cancel then they should stop designing animations that last longer than the GCD. Because heres the cold hard fact, if the devs were to recode the way abilities work so an ability only fired off when the animation finished, meaning that canceling the animation early meant the ability didn't go off, no one would use any skill with an animation longer than one second. Because using any ability that lasted longer than the one second GCD would always be a dps loss.

Delparis

Nestor wrote: »

9

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

I sat in a room with all the lead devs, combat designers and the game director and we spent an hour discussing Animation Canceling exclusively. We discussed timings and how to make it smoother. You know what was not discussed? Removing AC.

Its not going away. Even if it went away, they would just remove the animations or combat would just be a mess.

This just tells me that you're a bad "Community Ambassador", otherwise you would have brought it up, since obviously a lot of people disagree.

Or it tells me your unwilling to learn how to do animation cancelling.

And, by far, more people like AC or don't care than don't like AC. Because most people realize how bad turn based combat in a real time game is.

Go ahead try it, apply a skill, do a One One Thousand, apply a light attack and apply a skill again. Tell me how much fun that is. And, if you think AC sucks, just wait until you have to wait and time the application of the next skill to coincide with the end of the animation of the previous skill.

And, you know what, the players who are left will learn how to do that and they will keep cleaning your clock in PvP. Because you would still refuse to learn how to apply your skills and they will spend the time to apply skills to be as efficient and effective as the combat system allows.

Besides, since combat would be slowed to a crawl, the devs would just remove or shorten all animations so the game would end up playing like Starcraft does in a game bang.

I don't have access to devs, but i'm pretty sure that LA weaving and animation cancelling have huge impact on the server performance.
Can you confirm/deny this with them please ?

Jeremy

Conduit0 wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

In order to fix it they would probably have to abandon reactive blocking and dodging, which is a pretty substantial element of this game's combat system. So I'm going to have to defer here and say he's most likely right. It would be pretty difficult to fix and would probably require molding an entirely new combat system.

What they shouldn't do though is embrace the glitch and then actually design content around expecting players to use it.

Light attack weaving could be eliminated by simply putting light/heavy attacks on the same GCD as abilities.

Jeremy wrote: »

Light Attack Weaving is fine and should be encouraged. But wanting people to cancel their skill animations by blocking air so they can use moves faster is just stupid and that should not be encouraged by the developers. I should also note Wrobel is no longer in charge. So just because he encouraged it - that doesn't necessarily mean this new team is.

If the devs don't want people to block/barswap cancel then they should stop designing animations that last longer than the GCD. Because heres the cold hard fact, if the devs were to recode the way abilities work so an ability only fired off when the animation finished, meaning that canceling the animation early meant the ability didn't go off, no one would use any skill with an animation longer than one second. Because using any ability that lasted longer than the one second GCD would always be a dps loss.

I was not referring to light attack weaving when I made that comment. As I've tried to make clear - I do not see Light Attack Weaving as an unintended from of "animation canceling". I was referring to people who take advantage of the reactive block/dodge system to cut certain animations short. That would be difficult to fix, and would require them to abandon the current model for combat which the game has already been built upon.

To your second point: I suppose limiting all the animations to near instant intervals could work. But even that would require a lot of work. Animation isn't easy to do - or cheap - not to mention having super fast animations for everything would probably affect the visuals of the game in a negative way.

MehrunesFlagon

Delparis wrote: »

mairwen85 wrote: »

Delparis wrote: »

mairwen85 wrote: »

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Nope. Without LA weaving timing becomes less important, because skills get queued up by the game itself. You could press the next skill prematurely, and it would go off when the cooldown from the previous one is over, giving you up to 2 GCDs time to think about the next skill without losing any pace. This doesn't work currently (unless you use scripts that mimic this functionality with light attacks) because skills have higher priority than light attacks, and light attacks get overridden in the queue if you try to go as fast as possible.

Light attacks, skills and defensive manoeuvres have independent cool downs. The light attacks operates on a separate cool-down to skills, same for block/dodge/bar swap -- there is a queue, but not in the way you describe it. Yes light attacks can be cancelled in full if you pull your skill too soon, but not because they are on the same 'rail'. Try to do as many light attacks in 1s as you can. Let me know the result.

Skills have higher priority than light attacks, this is true, that's what animation cancelling is -- the skills priority overrides the animation of the preceding light attack animation. Because Light attacks are instant cast, they fire off immediately, therefore the animation can be overridden. Same for dodge and block, and bar swap, they override the animation for skill preceding them, but they will cancel in full any non-instant cast ability.

Weaving >>> Light attack | Skill in cool down of light attack | { light attack in cool down of skill | skill in cool down of light attack }

At any point bar swap / dodge roll / block

I may tell you something you already know:
You can add a wait time after a skill to get the full GCD duration

Which is my previous point exactly. You can macro with weaving, and you can macro without.

Weaving is not the product nor the driver for macros. Removing animation cancelling will not get rid of macros.

it will if Skills and LA/HA/Swap/block and dodge roll will share the same GCD.

Can you just shut up already?

starkerealm

Jeremy wrote: »

Katahdin wrote: »

None of this matters

The devs have said it's unintended but it's a thing.
They encourage use of weaving, animation cancelling and want people using it.

IT IS NOT GOING AWAY
DEAL WITH IT


/rant

Light Attack Weaving is fine and should be encouraged. But wanting people to cancel their skill animations by blocking air so they can use moves faster is just stupid and that should not be encouraged by the developers. I should also note Wrobel is no longer in charge. So just because he encouraged it - that doesn't necessarily mean this new team is.

Pretty sure Brian is on board with animation canceling. It's not like everyone who ever worked with Eric was fed to a grue the moment he left the building.

Also, the hell is that about block canceling? Block canceling doesn't let you use abilities faster, it just cancels certain animations. Nothing lets you break the GCDs, so it's not like you can block cancel to fire an ability faster, it'll still be on the same 1 per second schedule.

MehrunesFlagon

starkerealm wrote: »

runkorkoeb17_ESO wrote: »

Watch ANY of "end game elite" guides and you may notice they have not a single mistake in rotation/not one.

Which might be because they've practiced a few more times than you. This is like complaining that someone at the Carnegie doesn't fat finger their piano the way you do. Of course not, because they've been practicing. The amount of time people put into practicing their rotations is downright crazy sometimes.

Also, they do screw up.

Wouldn't surprise me if some people out there really do macro this stuff, but saying anyone in an elite guild must be macroing doesn't pass a scratch and sniff test.

I was tempted to use such an analogy.Seems I was beaten to it.

Cryptical

VaranisArano wrote: »

At this point, its intended.

There's a tip in the Level Up Advisor explaining how to Light Attack weave. I'm not sure how much more you want.

Weaving is not the same as animation cancelling.

Weaving is adding a light attach between skill activations.

Canceling is when the system cuts the time of skill activations down below the intended minimum length of the animations.

Weaving and canceling are not identical.

Jeremy

starkerealm wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Katahdin wrote: »

None of this matters

The devs have said it's unintended but it's a thing.
They encourage use of weaving, animation cancelling and want people using it.

IT IS NOT GOING AWAY
DEAL WITH IT


/rant

Light Attack Weaving is fine and should be encouraged. But wanting people to cancel their skill animations by blocking air so they can use moves faster is just stupid and that should not be encouraged by the developers. I should also note Wrobel is no longer in charge. So just because he encouraged it - that doesn't necessarily mean this new team is.

Pretty sure Brian is on board with animation canceling. It's not like everyone who ever worked with Eric was fed to a grue the moment he left the building.

Also, the hell is that about block canceling? Block canceling doesn't let you use abilities faster, it just cancels certain animations. Nothing lets you break the GCDs, so it's not like you can block cancel to fire an ability faster, it'll still be on the same 1 per second schedule.

I just had this debate and don't really feel like repeating it.

So all I can say is go observe many of the online guides about "animation canceling" that involve using block to cancel animations to increase damage and take it up with them.

My point is no developer should embrace or encourage the concept of blocking air to speed up rotations. That's stupid and no content should be designed where players are expected to do that sort of thing.

MehrunesFlagon

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

9

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

I sat in a room with all the lead devs, combat designers and the game director and we spent an hour discussing Animation Canceling exclusively. We discussed timings and how to make it smoother. You know what was not discussed? Removing AC.

Its not going away. Even if it went away, they would just remove the animations or combat would just be a mess.

This just tells me that you're a bad "Community Ambassador", otherwise you would have brought it up, since obviously a lot of people disagree.

Or it tells me your unwilling to learn how to do animation cancelling.

And, by far, more people like AC or don't care than don't like AC. Because most people realize how bad turn based combat in a real time game is.

Go ahead try it, apply a skill, do a One One Thousand, apply a light attack and apply a skill again. Tell me how much fun that is. And, if you think AC sucks, just wait until you have to wait and time the application of the next skill to coincide with the end of the animation of the previous skill.

And, you know what, the players who are left will learn how to do that and they will keep cleaning your clock in PvP. Because you would still refuse to learn how to apply your skills and they will spend the time to apply skills to be as efficient and effective as the combat system allows.

Besides, since combat would be slowed to a crawl, the devs would just remove or shorten all animations so the game would end up playing like Starcraft does in a game bang.

If you call using skills that are on a GCD "turn based combat", then ESO already has "turn based combat", you just can perform 2 actions per turn instead of one, which how exactly isn't closer to Starcraft than my proposal? You're contradicting yourself in the same message by presenting a scenario that you consider desirable and then saying it's not desirable at the same time.

And yeah, most people like AC, me included. I just don't like that one aspect of it that we call "light attack weaving". So yeah, you're right, most people like AC, but among the people who you put in the category of "liking AC" there are plenty who sure as hell are not on your side on this. And going beyond that I would like to point you towards the wikipedia article about survivorship bias. Multiple people that I tried to introduce to the game have quit because of it, that's voices you'll never get to hear. Not to mention the fact that on the forums you see the people most involved with the game, and not so much the casuals who just play the game, oblivious to the existence of this "mechanic" in the first place.

Also, it's irrelevant whether or not I want to learn AC (spoiler alert: I do it all the time). I know you just wanted to use some witty comeback after I stated the obvious that hit too close to home for you, but the fact is, if you want to be a good representative, you have to mention all concerns, not just those of the majority, put them in the right context, and fairly represent the arguments being made. You did not do that, ergo, bad community ambassador.

What would be the point of Light Attacks to begin with if not to weave between your skills?

Using as a free, low damage spammable when you're struggling to keep resources up with a spammable that costs resources.

Which would end up being absolutely absurd.Do expect them to redesign elemental drian?

Cryptical

Reverb wrote: »

Old news. Here’s a 2015 ESO live, where Wrobel acknowledged they "are embracing it. It's a part of the game, and we want people to be doing it". His words. (Edit to embed link)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThZtwhYkKSs

And where’s Wrobel now?

Oh yeah. Not with the company anymore.

Something else wrobel said would never happen? Depositing alliance points in the bank. Guess how THAT turned out.

Jeremy

Cryptical wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

At this point, its intended.

There's a tip in the Level Up Advisor explaining how to Light Attack weave. I'm not sure how much more you want.

Weaving is not the same as animation cancelling.

Weaving is adding a light attach between skill activations.

Canceling is when the system cuts the time of skill activations down below the intended minimum length of the animations.

Weaving and canceling are not identical.

Thank you.

At least someone else understands there is a difference in weaving and then animation canceling.

I wish the two would stop being lumped together.

Ragnaroek93

@Delparis I really wonder how good you would be at the game if you would actually try to improve instead of spamming threads which boil to l2p issues. Sorry if this sounds harsh, but many people actually enjoy animation cancelling and it's been in the game since release (and it's not even difficult to learn if you're willing to put minimal effort into the game). Just as a hint, if you look at the recent patches you will mostly see nerfs, don't you think that we nerfed already enough? Isn't the game already dumped down enough? Would you like to see us all playing naked and spamming fist attacks?

And after all removing animation cancelling would require you to rework the whole game, it would could massive imbalances. If you really hate so many mechanics in this game, it's maybe time to think if this is the right game for you (you can also feel free to play WoW Classic there you have abilities with 3,5 seconds cast time...).

Runkorko

Ragnaroek93 wrote: »

And after all removing animation cancelling would require you to rework the whole game, it would could massive imbalances.

Wont agree with you here.

Atleast 50% of the comunity play without animation/cancer. Weaving, yes a/c now
Yet they are able to both pvp and pve.
Games is imbalanced for then when they need to compete with mouse macros and script users.
Not all who use a/c are such, but big part of them.

Katahdin

Jeremy wrote: »

Katahdin wrote: »

None of this matters

The devs have said it's unintended but it's a thing.
They encourage use of weaving, animation cancelling and want people using it.

IT IS NOT GOING AWAY
DEAL WITH IT


/rant

Light Attack Weaving is fine and should be encouraged. But wanting people to cancel their skill animations by blocking air so they can use moves faster is just stupid and that should not be encouraged by the developers. I should also note Wrobel is no longer in charge. So just because he encouraged it - that doesn't necessarily mean this new team is.

I dont know anyone that uses block to animation cancel any more because they dont need to. If the new team wanted to stop it, they would have by now.

This horse is so dead, it's skeleton is a pile of dust

N00BxV1

This one time at band camp, I got blackout drunk and accidentally *** my pants. It was totally unintended, but to save face I told everyone it was intended, and now it's just accepted. You haven't lived until you've gotten blackout drunk at band camp and *** your pants.

Cryptical

I’ve wondered if they are slowly, quietly, piecemeal rolling back animation cancelling under cover of skill rewrites and other things.

People have claimed it is embraced for years, but the fact remains that it was not desired and was targeted for being patched away until mapping the changes revealed it was rooted too deeply at the time.

But that was then. Since those days there have been entire rewrites of the player account database. The base game has been reorganized for streamlining and performance boosting. The group finder has been rewritten entirely, with barely visible changes from the player end - and there’s nothing more core to the multiplayer aspect of a game than the group finder that enables people to form teams.

So it is easily possible that the patches and updates over the past couple years for combat streamlining have also resulted in a combat system where animation cancelling is not deeply rooted at all.

Runkorko

Katahdin wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Katahdin wrote: »

None of this matters

The devs have said it's unintended but it's a thing.
They encourage use of weaving, animation cancelling and want people using it.

IT IS NOT GOING AWAY
DEAL WITH IT


/rant

Light Attack Weaving is fine and should be encouraged. But wanting people to cancel their skill animations by blocking air so they can use moves faster is just stupid and that should not be encouraged by the developers. I should also note Wrobel is no longer in charge. So just because he encouraged it - that doesn't necessarily mean this new team is.

I dont know anyone that uses block to animation cancel any more because they dont need to. If the new team wanted to stop it, they would have by now.

This horse is so dead, it's skeleton is a pile of dust

But his s..ts stil stink m8.
Smth must be done

SpacemanSpiff1

this is old news.