idk wrote: »

You can doubt all you want to. It is your prerogative to have an opinion even if it is one without anything to support it.

Well, right back at you? As I said, my experience might be anecdotal, but that lies in the nature of the topic because we don't have the statistical data to come to more robust conclusions - we don't even know how many people are actively playing the game, no matter how many millions of created accounts ZOS proclaims every year.

idk wrote: »

I do find it interesting how you edited the quote to remove the parts that are inconvenient you your statement here. That speaks volumes.

lol. I omitted "It does not seem ESO has had problems brining in new players." because I already addressed ESO's success in the first part. Replying to it is not inconvenient, it's redundant. I make it a habit to quote things directly I intend to reply to (like now), as nothing annoys me more in forums than people quoting whole posts when they only reply with a few lines. I feel it really inhibits readability.

idk wrote: »

Also, I think you have that backwards as good and proper weaving only adds a slight movement compared to the motion the character makes when firing off the skill. I think you are just running with some players doing something wrong if you think the better one weaves the more ridiculous it looks. Maybe you can post a video of what you are talking about as it make no sense as is.

I'm sorry, the issue is so apparent that anyone who has weaved a single skill in this game can see it. You can look at any parse video you like. When you cancel animations, it has to look janky because the transitions to and from the neutral stance are removed or cut short.

Paramedicus wrote: »

With AC game looks glichy and combat isn't intuitive (you gotta admit that possibiliy to use skill and cancel just it's animation is odd).

To be honest, I don't really understand that. Do you watch your own character's animations to determine when you've hit an enemy? I don't, and never did. The idea never even occurred to me. First, as soon as the attack was fired, I did the next thing - next light attack, next skill, bar swap, whatever. Then, after finding out about the little delays built in (like the GCD), I don't do things right away but time them a bit better, but the general idea stays the same: Attack goes off, you're free to do other things, whatever fancy stuff your character does on screen. I find it quite intuitive.

But then, I come from a background where things happening on screen are not that important, the calculations behind the scenes are. Did you play TES3:Morrowind? Where you hacked your sword at an enemy but whether you hit or not was not determined by collision boxes but entirely by a dice roll in the background? The visual elements were mostly just eye-candy, they didn't really matter. (Well, you had to aim in the general direction of the enemy, but that's it.)

Similarly here. Animations are eye-candy, like sun rays or clouds. If they get in the way of things that really matter, they take a back seat. That's the idea behind cancelling them, and I find that approach quite normal and reasonable.

idk wrote: »

So you said back at ya, to have me back up my comments and here it is. We can all have our opinions, I am basing mine on actual information.

I stopped at that point as I have better things to do. I can back up my words that ESO is doing just fine attracting new player and added that the industry considers it a top MMORPG.

Has there been a misunderstanding? I never intended to claim that ESO's not doing fine, just that many people who don't stay or give the game a try cite the combat as one of their main issues. I took your objection to mean that you think people stay because of ESO's combat, if that's not the case I apologize.

ESO has many reasons to play even if the combat is not to one's liking, but the fact that people are still discussing their dissatisfaction with animation canceling nearly 6 years into the games life should be a hint that it does have an effect on the perception of the game.

Personally, I don't care one way or another. Even though it does look silly to me.

How about we just bring back Soft Caps.

idk wrote: »

Paramedicus wrote: »

@idk
Yep, current combat is poor because it's some odd compromise between slow GCD-system and 'fast-paced-combat', where main thing that makes combat actually faster is animation canceling. With AC game looks glichy and combat isn't intuitive (you gotta admit that possibiliy to use skill and cancel just it's animation is odd). But without AC game combat would become slow-poke-fest. Very sophisticated system indeed.

You are changing your message here. You specifically said GCD makes combat poor. Now you are twisting that previous statement into something totally different after it was pointed out how wrong you were.


Further, you clearly do not understand why games use a GCD for standardization as you are advocating no standardization. I do not even now where to begin trying to explain that because it seems so obvious with both balancing the game and players executing skills in combat.

What is more telling that you do not care about anything other than your idea of what you specifically stated you wanted is you are still ignoring what I suggested in my third reply to you. A much simpler solution that is more direct, would be easier to implement and balance, would not add additional load to the server, and easier for players to use because it does use a standardization. So if ZoS has chosen not to go for that easier fix they are certainly not going to go for the one that takes more work up front, ands more workload balancing the game long term and likely adds more server load. Not to mention the lack of standardization being more challenging on lesser skilled players like the current design is.

So you have fun with your idea. Cheers.

@idk
Hmmm, talking with you is bit frustrating. You accuse me of not understanding basic concepts like GCD, or that I twist my statemets or that my arguments don't make sense. Is this your tactic to win an argument (do you think that if you call someone stupid, that it makes them stupid and their reasoning invalid?).

My proposition is pretty coherent. In 1st post i stated that problem isn't GCD but instant casting with animation canceling. Why did you took my later statement about GCD out of context is unknown for me. Last post that you quote, synthesizes what i said in 1st post with later posts about GCD.

Anyway, GCD-system alone compared with no-GCD system is poor (simpler) for obvious reasons. GCD being simple control mechanism isn't inherently bad ofc, because you may still make combat system deeper, by adding various types of spells etc (like MMORPGs tend to do).
But what makes current system (AC+GCD) additionally bad is that it gives odd results even if being simple:

• glitchy looking combat - new player, when doing weavings accidentally, most likely will think that it is just some graphic bug, animation desync, server lag etc. Fact that people still don't get it today and you see many topic about this should give you idea that there may be something wrong with that design.
• counterintuitive, non-realistic mechanic - irl you can't bend time and finish making some move before you done making it [is that still english?]. Idea that your ability was casted before you finished casting it (animation cancel) is bit mind-bending, so possibility of learing about its utility spontaneously is very limited.

People defend current system with AC/weaving, because it supposedly makes combat so much more complex and skill oriented. To be fair, it's more skill oriented, than if there wouldn't be any type to canceling and I guess this is main reason why some people whine, when anyone says it should be changed (they are afraid to be left locked in clunky animation without AC). But with my proposition implemended, people could still cancel (just not only animation), so they would have to be more cautious about it (to not cancel ability unintentionally or needlessly). They would have to care more which skill or combo they will want to use in given situation. But there would also new tacticts emerge, like ability-feinting (at expense of some resource loss). This not-so-complex proposition, would give way deeper, still fast-paced and more reactive combat experience than current weave-to-win solution.

You may not like my proposition. I get it. You can speculate how much other people wouldn't like it, but you can't claim that most people like current system because ESO is being sold in many copies (sorry but thats is illogical reasoning). I can somewhat agree with you, that such big change would be controversial for significant amount of players, and that implementing it could be potentially too risky. You can also speculate how it would affect server performance. You cannot know it, because you don't know how much current system with more rapid action registering (and checking with GCD) would perform compared to more fuild one. Beside that, i stated that devs could remove some of effects (especially some of CC ones, since anything that interrupts would be good CC already) and maybe other abilites/debuffs too (if you can have more complex and responsive combat, why would you want to artificially clutter it with abilites doing similar stuff [i.e. increase dmg done vs received vs weapon damage vs weapon power]?). [Those arguments apply to balancing gameplay also]. You can also speculate why devs won't implement it (to make you happy, I can agree with you that this most likely will never happen).

And why some games use GCD? You have to use it, when your skills have instant cast and no internal cooldown for sure. And other reason? To make combat slower and more predictable (thus easier, but I heard that elite players want current system to be left alone because of skilzzzz, not because it makes game easy). There are games, like FPSs, where every weapon has different rate of fire and different bullet travel speed, and they don't use anything resembling GCD (because that would tard whole system obviously).

So again, current ESO system is attempt to speed up combat system. I understand why devs did it, but IMO results are questionable (to put it nicely). Maybe they couldn't do it in different way, because this is what they can get from engine or maybe they think this system is OK, because some other games use it. I dunno, but this doesn't' change my opinion about it.

And about your propositinon of fix:

idk wrote: »

There is also a better way to do it that does not require changing the combat sequence and is much more logical. Change all animations for executing a skill to fit the GCD. Much simpler, though still a lot of work, and makes so much more sense. However, Zos has already chosen not to do this so it and your idea are basically non-starters at the moment.

Sorry, but I don't understand how this would fix flaws of current combat system (flaws seen from my perspective). If you could elaborate...

@idk
Ok, i see that you have some problem with understanding what I'm saying. That's probably my fault, english isn't my 1st language and I may just fail to write clearly.

1. I'm not changing my statements, almost in every post i'm writing same stuff again and again, with added something here and there (which isn't in conflict with anything I previousy wrote, so i really don't get that accusation).
2. We started to write about GCD, just because you brought it up. Tweaking GCD or animations around it IMO won't make flaws that I see in game to go away. That's why i'm not talking about GCD in my first post (and that's why I didn't react to your proposition - I don't understand how it would fix anything TBH). For me, that our whole discussion about GCD is bit irrelevant. You stared to defend GCD, so we continued to talk about it.
3. So later, to make my point i was comparing 3 combat systems (maybe this added to confusion even more):
   • current (Animation Canceling + Global Cooldown)
   • mine (Skill Canceling + various cast times + no GCD)
   • slowest one aka what people are afraid to get if AC would be disabled (GCD only)
4. Why GCD system makes combat poor (more simple) as compared to no-GCD one? Sorry, i just thought I don't have to elaborate there. OK then: if you take two hypothetical combat systems, where you can only deal damage with simple abilites (no LAs, no dots, debuffs, etc - to keep exaple simple), then system with GCD will be more simple (because GCD decrease variability). If skills are instant and GCD is 1s, then you can use skills every 1s (or more). In system w/o GCD you could use them also in intervals bellow 1s. If abilities would have some cast time (let's say, half of them 0.5s cast time, and other half 2s) then in described GCD system, you could use half of them every 1s and others every 2s. In no-GCD system you could still use half of abilites faster than every 1s. Basicially, GCD acts like speed limit, thus must limit complexity of system.

"https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/478785/eso-announces-13-5-million-players-up-2-5-million-from-last-year/p1"]this is a link to a thread that contains links to Zos announcing total copies sold over the years[/url]. It shows that Zos has no issues drawing new players in. As of last summer that is 13.5M. That is copies sold, not free trials"

i hate how Zos says 13.5 million players, it is so off to purposely misrepresent the real player base. Keep in mind that also counts all the copies sold to botters and all that.

I would bet 1.5 million active going to 2.5 during new contents. Even Zos has stated that people come for new content, then leave right after.

I really hope people don't actually believe the 13.5 million means active players, i know some people do.

idk wrote: »

Paramedicus wrote: »

@idk
Ok, i see that you have some problem with understanding what I'm saying.

So we are back to this because I think your idea is a bad idea all around

Nope i wrote that because you accussed me of changing statements and switching arguments, which I never did. I could recognize it as some kind of misunderstanding (which is very likely since I could mess up my english). I could also assume that this is just your discussion style, where you like to switch from victim role (me belittling you, when i write that there could be misunderstanding or ignoring your proposition to fix [well, that might be bit rude on my part]) to oppressor role (you saying that my arguments don't make sense or that i don't understand basic concepts like GCD). I prefer to assume that there is some goodwill between us, so it must be some kind of misunderstatement.

But if you really want to talk about your idea for fix then lets do it:

idk wrote: »

The game already has a check on the use of each skill. There is a GCD tied to each skill that must pass for the skill to do damage.

In other words, what you say happens is wrong. It misses that important element and as such paints a false picture. It also means what you say it could be is irrelevant as there is already the check/control in the current system and no reason to consider the suggestion. Especially since it is based on a false premise.

idk wrote: »

There is also a better way to do it that does not require changing the combat sequence and is much more logical. Change all animations for executing a skill to fit the GCD. Much simpler, though still a lot of work, and makes so much more sense. However, Zos has already chosen not to do this so it and your idea are basically non-starters at the moment.

First of all, I don't think that you described GCD mechanic correctly. Damage registering isn't tied to GCD intervalls.

• GCD is external cooldown for abilities (when abilities have instant cast time like in ESO and they don't have their cooldowns [at least i don't see tooltips mentioning them] then you need mechanic like GCD. Without it, you could use abilites with rate of fire of machine gun.
• I don't know how often info about damage is updated in ESO. I'm sure that it is much less than 1s, and I would expect that those intervals are few hundredths of a second long. For action based games you want them to be shortest possible, but shorter they are, the more demanding whole process gonna be for servers. But anyway, idk what ESO might consider as fast enough.
• You can check that by yourself: just turn combat text on and use two different abilities with DoT on something (just don't time firing them with GCD by accident). You will see that damage registering isnt tied to some external 1s intervall. If you use some other ability without DoT you should also be able to notice, that it won't take 1s for damage to be apllied (but it is harder to see it that way tho, because you have to take into account your input lag, your ping and time that server needs to update and print it on screen, there also may be added some lag on purpose by devs [so in reality instant abilites are never instant and this may give illusion that whole procces takes second]). If you play on PC, download Global Cooldown Bar addon, it will let you see that it takes less than 1s for dmg to register (more like 0.6-0.7s for me, but it's probably even faster, because game may count stuff much faster, than it's shown on screen.

Anyway, even if devs decided to tie damage to GCD, I still don't understand how your proposition would fix things. One reason is, that i'm not sure what you mean in second quote (this is my language barrier - I can't quite visualize what you described). And second reason - in case I understand what you wrote correctly - I don't see how syncing animations with GCD, would make canceling them look less glitchy (or whole AC idea less mind boggling).

idk wrote: »

Yes, you do keep saying a lot of the same thing but you have not refuted what I have said why the idea you presented is bad. All you have really said is your idea is good because you think it is good.

I have to disagree. Sure you can tell that I spectulate how it would (or wouldnt') affect devs, game performance or community, but I can use same argument. Anyway, I'm able to acklowledge that my reasoning didn't convince you and that's perfectly fine.

idk wrote: »

Considering every MMORPG developers that I can think of prefer to use the control mechanism of a GCD and if you paid even the slightest attention to the forums it becomes apparent players do not want cast times it does not seem your idea holds up to scrutiny.

GCD is simple yet effective solution if you want to slow down combat system. In games where there are skills with instant cast times and no cooldowns (ESO), GCD is necessary. If you want to stay with GCD+instant cast system (because as dev you are used to it or this is how game engine operates best), but you still want to speed up combat, then you may add this 'duct tape type of fix' called animation canceling (hopefully intentionally).
As for community being sceptic about cast times:

• instant abilities gonna be always faster than abilites with cast times, and in combat you generally want to be as fastest as it is possible, so bias is reasonable just for that.
• BUT cast time abilites have more disadvantages beside being slower (and if that wouldn't be the case, then i think ppl would tolerate them more). For example, if you use block/dodge with instant ability, damage will be still apllied, but if you use block/dodge with cast time ability damage won't be applied. Or you can bar-swap instant ability, but you can't do it with cast time ones. This makes them really clunkier and just harder to use in combat where you need to be responsive. Even if devs decide to make them strong enough to make up for those disadvantages, you may still hate their clunkiness compared to instant ones (especially, since they have really long cast times like 1s or more).
• possibility to weave damage will give better short-term reward for some players, comparted to system where weaving isn't possible (you can stack more damage and seeing big numbers is fun).
• some people are afraid that system without animation canceling, would also mean that you can't cancel your actions, which would make gameplay too unresponsive.
• some people got used to this system, they learned it, git gut by abiding by it's rules - so why would they want to become newbs and be forced to learn new system? Nobody likes changes.
• some people just like current system, they don't care about it flaws and if there could be anything else implemented;
• some people would still prefer old system, because they like that type of gameplay.
• idk and this list is getting too long.

idk wrote: »

In case I did not say it earlier, we can all have our opinions and I am not suggesting you cannot have yours. I merely try to base mine in what is known to actually work and in this case there is a lot of examples of a GCD system well in a great many successful MMORPGs.

Edit: again, name a major MMORPG that does not use a GCD to help support your claim. Then we have something real to talk about.

Again, I don't think that there is anything inherently bad with GCD system (thus why it works in so many games). But IMO it is odd decision, to keep it and add glitchy AC to speed up combat (but i will agree, that if your engine won't allow to have anything else, then it is better than having GCD-alone).
And about MMORPG which does'nt use GCD. I'm not sure, but basically, any MMORPG, where abilities have their internal cooldowns and game won't allow you to use two abilites at same time, don't need GCD - so I'm sure that there are many MMORPG that don't use it.

jcm2606 wrote: »

JamieAubrey wrote: »

GOOD

Hopefully I wont die to the same skill 5x in a second

Literally impossible thanks to the GCD, but okay.

If you're on Xbox NA we can wager 100k that it is quite possible. I'll even provide clips 😉

I use it but I don't like it. I wish it was gone, personally.

L2Pissue wrote: »

We don't need animation canceling we need more players!! If animation cancelling is gone for good and new/noob players can play and enjoy then it's best
I prefer this game contested with players than empty but have super skilled players
Since skilled players do not do pledges with noobs anyway so noobs quit!!

Skilled tanks avoid PUGs, some do anyway, for obvious reasons. Skilled DPS have no reason to avoid PUGs. In a lot of cases they could probably solo the content anyway so they don't have the same reason to avoid the PUGs as tanks unless they simply had a group of friends lined up already. It's a large to net to cast, everyone does things for their own reasons, but I see good dps in PUGs.

Unless they adjusted the content to reflect the loss in damage I suspect that it would have a negative impact on harder dungeons. Less over all damage means more mechanics. That wouldn't be particularly friendly to new players either.