Maintenance for the week of February 23:
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
· [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
· [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
A note for anti-Animation Canceling people
StaticWave
✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭
✭✭✭
Scrolling through a bunch of animation cancelling(AC) posts and I see a similarity in arguments made anti-AC people:
1) AC makes the server lag
2) AC is a glitch/exploit or unintended
3) AC doesn't make sense because skills should play out the full duration
4) AC should cancel the skill all together, not deal damage and only cancel the animation
I'm pretty sure there are a few more but I can't recall off the top of my head. Anyways, while I do understand their reasoning to support the removal of AC, I think some of the arguments are rather misinformed. I'll give some 2 cents, but for the sake of argument let's take it with a grain of salt.
1) This argument is very common and I think it is extremely misinformed. Their reasoning is that the server has to do extra calculations when people AC, which makes the game lag. However, they completely ignore the fact that there is a 1 second global cool down(GCD) for skills, and another GCD for light/heavy attacks in the game. When you attempt AC, you are still limited by the 1s GCD. There is nothing you can do to bypass it. Therefore, what you're actually doing with AC is canceling the animation on client side. It has no bearing on the server whatsoever because of the GCD. What truly makes the game lag, is the amount of people in one place, the amount of people in a campaign, or just crappy server performance. Think cyrodiil for example. Why is it that when there are 2 bars across all faction, the game runs smoothly with very good ping, but the moment a large ball group of 20 players show up at your place, despite population counter showing only 2 bars, your ping shoots up by 30-40ms? Why is it that you can be standing at your base in a pop locked campaign, with zero players around, but your ping is constantly in the high 200ms?
2) Wrobel and pretty much everyone in the development team have confirmed that while AC is an unintended mechanic, it is NOT an exploit/glitch. In fact, Wrobel even encouraged players to AC during a live stream. Below is the link to that stream:
https://youtu.be/ThZtwhYkKSs
Not only that, but ZOS released a patch that increased light attack/heavy attack damage to encourage weaving them with normal skills. It is only cheating when ZOS says it is, but AC is clearly supported by them, so I think there is nothing to argue here.
3) This argument is very weak and is extremely selfish. Skills do play out their full duration, so if anti-AC people want to enjoy looking at skill animation, there is literally nothing stopping them from letting the animations play out. What doesn't make sense is trying to force that ideology on players who do want to AC.
4) There are two types of skills in this game, instant cast and channel. With instant abilities, the effect is applied immediately as you press a skill. This means that AC on instant abilities is entirely client side, and has no bearing on the server. Can we make the claim that it is useless to attempt AC on those abilities? No, we cannot, because what AC can do with instant abilities, is to allow you to perform defensive maneuvers with basically zero tradeoffs. That is why the block change is getting blasted so much because the previous version had basically zero weak spots. According to ZOS, "Activating block while animating an ability or attack will now blend the animation more fluidly instead of completely obfuscating the attack. The core mechanics to block cancelling remain untouched, but now display more of the previous attack’s animation before your character animates the block.". While this does not change the core mechanics of block cancelling, it does add a very small cast time to block because the animation of the previous skill is displayed more. This means that when you block cancel a skill, there is a very small window where you're left vulnerable. It also feels clunky too.
On the other hand, channeled abilities only apply the effect AFTER it has completed it's full animation duration. That is why skills like Wrecking Blow, Dark Conversion, Dark Flare, etc. and ultimates with a cast time, will only deal actual damage if you go through its full animation duration. If you attempt to animation cancel channeled abilities, you will cancel it all together and deal no damage. When anti-AC people want it removed because they think AC should cancel the skill and damage all together, they are unintentionally going down a dangerous road here. You see, the only practical way for ZOS to do such a thing, is to give all abilities a cast time like they did to some ultimates. Given how much people hate that change, let me ask you, anti-AC people, do you honestly think it would be a good decision?
One last note I would like to make for anti-Animation Canceling people. I assume the AC you're referring to is light attack weaving, no? Since there are 2 separate GCD for skills and light attacks, I think the only possible way for ZOS to remove that feature completely is to give both skills and light attacks the same GCD, which forces you to pick between the two. However that would probably cause a lot of issues in PvE.
Hopefully this post will shed some light on this ongoing topic.
Edited by StaticWave on February 28, 2020 3:10AM 1) AC makes the server lag
2) AC is a glitch/exploit or unintended
3) AC doesn't make sense because skills should play out the full duration
4) AC should cancel the skill all together, not deal damage and only cancel the animation
I'm pretty sure there are a few more but I can't recall off the top of my head. Anyways, while I do understand their reasoning to support the removal of AC, I think some of the arguments are rather misinformed. I'll give some 2 cents, but for the sake of argument let's take it with a grain of salt.
1) This argument is very common and I think it is extremely misinformed. Their reasoning is that the server has to do extra calculations when people AC, which makes the game lag. However, they completely ignore the fact that there is a 1 second global cool down(GCD) for skills, and another GCD for light/heavy attacks in the game. When you attempt AC, you are still limited by the 1s GCD. There is nothing you can do to bypass it. Therefore, what you're actually doing with AC is canceling the animation on client side. It has no bearing on the server whatsoever because of the GCD. What truly makes the game lag, is the amount of people in one place, the amount of people in a campaign, or just crappy server performance. Think cyrodiil for example. Why is it that when there are 2 bars across all faction, the game runs smoothly with very good ping, but the moment a large ball group of 20 players show up at your place, despite population counter showing only 2 bars, your ping shoots up by 30-40ms? Why is it that you can be standing at your base in a pop locked campaign, with zero players around, but your ping is constantly in the high 200ms?
2) Wrobel and pretty much everyone in the development team have confirmed that while AC is an unintended mechanic, it is NOT an exploit/glitch. In fact, Wrobel even encouraged players to AC during a live stream. Below is the link to that stream:
https://youtu.be/ThZtwhYkKSsNot only that, but ZOS released a patch that increased light attack/heavy attack damage to encourage weaving them with normal skills. It is only cheating when ZOS says it is, but AC is clearly supported by them, so I think there is nothing to argue here.
3) This argument is very weak and is extremely selfish. Skills do play out their full duration, so if anti-AC people want to enjoy looking at skill animation, there is literally nothing stopping them from letting the animations play out. What doesn't make sense is trying to force that ideology on players who do want to AC.
4) There are two types of skills in this game, instant cast and channel. With instant abilities, the effect is applied immediately as you press a skill. This means that AC on instant abilities is entirely client side, and has no bearing on the server. Can we make the claim that it is useless to attempt AC on those abilities? No, we cannot, because what AC can do with instant abilities, is to allow you to perform defensive maneuvers with basically zero tradeoffs. That is why the block change is getting blasted so much because the previous version had basically zero weak spots. According to ZOS, "Activating block while animating an ability or attack will now blend the animation more fluidly instead of completely obfuscating the attack. The core mechanics to block cancelling remain untouched, but now display more of the previous attack’s animation before your character animates the block.". While this does not change the core mechanics of block cancelling, it does add a very small cast time to block because the animation of the previous skill is displayed more. This means that when you block cancel a skill, there is a very small window where you're left vulnerable. It also feels clunky too.
On the other hand, channeled abilities only apply the effect AFTER it has completed it's full animation duration. That is why skills like Wrecking Blow, Dark Conversion, Dark Flare, etc. and ultimates with a cast time, will only deal actual damage if you go through its full animation duration. If you attempt to animation cancel channeled abilities, you will cancel it all together and deal no damage. When anti-AC people want it removed because they think AC should cancel the skill and damage all together, they are unintentionally going down a dangerous road here. You see, the only practical way for ZOS to do such a thing, is to give all abilities a cast time like they did to some ultimates. Given how much people hate that change, let me ask you, anti-AC people, do you honestly think it would be a good decision?
One last note I would like to make for anti-Animation Canceling people. I assume the AC you're referring to is light attack weaving, no? Since there are 2 separate GCD for skills and light attacks, I think the only possible way for ZOS to remove that feature completely is to give both skills and light attacks the same GCD, which forces you to pick between the two. However that would probably cause a lot of issues in PvE.
Hopefully this post will shed some light on this ongoing topic.
39
-
dazee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭I understand that some people fear that fixing animation cancelling will ruin the feel of combat, or make them lose their dps advantage.
Nothing is farther from the desires of the people who want it fixed. We merely don't want something which clearly makes no logical sense as an intended feature to give a gameplay advantage.
We dont even want it removed. we just want it to stop being required for dps. This is a very reasonable request.Playing your character the way your character should play is all that matters. Play as well as you can but never betray the character. Doing so would make playing an mmoRPG pointless.23 -
Moonsorrow✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Well said, hopefully some of the anti-AC people understand it and how things (the whole game) would change if what they wanted really happened.
It would become like turn-based slow old game without fast combat. Masses of people would leave because it would not be the same game at all anymore that got us into liking it in the first place.
Animation cancel explained simply: You are a tank at pve dungeon, you decide to heavy attack the boss with your SnB to regain some stamina for blocking needs, but.. boss just then does a big hit - with animation cancel you can in middle of that heavy attack turn into Blocking and not die to that big hit. Without animation cancel - you would be stuck to do that heavy attack to the end AND eat that boss hit and die since you could not change to Block.
So simple, but i wonder why so hard to understand to many that this game needs animation canceling and it is not just about Light Attack weaving.
Just think about my example too dear anti-ac person, i mean you no harm - but game would really suck if it turned into a turn-based MMO where you cannot switch from attacks to Block, to Dodge fast enough to avoid deaths (in both pve and pvp). You would hate the game if you got your wish through.12 -
Starlock✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I stopped skimming when I got to the point where logic is apparently selfish. Really? I mean... really?Edited by Starlock on February 27, 2020 8:06PM18 -
dazee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭I stopped skimming when I got to the point where logic is apparently selfish. Really? I mean... really?
Exactly, all people want is for a feature which makes no sense to exist (Why make animations at all?) to NOT grant a tangible gameplay advantage. Were not the ones being unreasonable. its pretty clear who is.Playing your character the way your character should play is all that matters. Play as well as you can but never betray the character. Doing so would make playing an mmoRPG pointless.14 -
RefLiberty✭✭✭✭✭
✭They could just copy wow skill mechanics from the start and GG. But it got messed up from the start and now it is hard if not impossible to fix.
To be honest, AC is a bug and bad mechanic which should not be in the game at all. There is no logic to it at all. Look how wow combat is fluid and no canceling or similar stuff, it has been made properly from the start.
AC is like you are throwing a rock but instead of full throw, you slap yourself in face but rock is launched anyway, stupid.
Not to mention that is annoying to mash the light attack button all the time between casting skills, for me it is annoying AF and illogical.
But yeah, hard to fix now since it is messed up from the start.
To fix skill casting Vs animations should be reworked from the scratch and I don't think we will see that, so I just accepted it as it is, broken as it is.
Ah well, sigh ...9 -
roflcopter✭✭✭They should just have a setting where people could just turn off the animations all together and be done with it.
It's not worth the toxicity that AC has caused and it's embarrassing for ZOS.
I personally think AC has hurt the player base more than helped the game.Edited by roflcopter on February 27, 2020 8:17PMXbox One | NA | AD
GM - OK LOL
Warden Stuff
Ex - Trials Core 1 Runner - Left and couldn't be happier16 -
Starlock✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I stopped skimming when I got to the point where logic is apparently selfish. Really? I mean... really?
Exactly, all people want is for a feature which makes no sense to exist (Why make animations at all?) to NOT grant a tangible gameplay advantage. Were not the ones being unreasonable. its pretty clear who is.
Eh, I don't even care about the alleged gameplay advantages. I just prefer a game that makes sense and for animation cancelling, where present, to be implemented well. But nah, forget the nuances of perspectives, I'm just "anti-animation cancelling" even though I don't want to see animation cancelling removed from the game.0 -
StaticWave✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭I stopped skimming when I got to the point where logic is apparently selfish. Really? I mean... really?
Maybe you shouldn't have skimmed
. The logic is selfish because skills DO play out the full animation duration. What is stopping them from letting the animations play out? Literally nothing.
Let me make an example so you can understand why I said the logic is selfish. You and I both own a car in a state where car modding is allowed. I want my car to have more speed and look nicer the way I like it, so I mod my car. You, however, think cars shouldn't be modded because it changes how the car originally looks, and what's the point of attaching a car with all these parts when people can alter it? So you demand the state to ban car modding. Do you see why it is a selfish argument?
There's actually a real world example of this logic. It's called communism. I lived in a communist country, and when the communist party took over they went to all the wealthy people in the country and removed a large part of their wealth because they believed people should be financially equal . In fact my aunt fled the country carrying as much of her wealth(in gold bars) as she could before the government could get to her.
Animations do play out the full duration, and ZOS does not disapprove AC. We're both given the opportunity to AC if we want to, but when people make the argument that AC needs to be banned because animations should be played out, they're making a selfish argument.
Edited by StaticWave on February 27, 2020 9:16PM11 -
Starlock✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭StaticWave wrote: »I stopped skimming when I got to the point where logic is apparently selfish. Really? I mean... really?
Maybe you shouldn't have skimmed. The logic is selfish because skills DO play out the full animation duration. What is stopping them from letting the animations play out? Literally nothing.
Let me make an example so you can understand why I said the logic is selfish. You and I both own a car in a state where car modding is allowed. I want my car to have more speed and look nicer the way I like it, so I mod my car. You, however, think cars shouldn't be modded because it changes how the car originally looks, so you demand the state to ban car modding. Do you see why it is a selfish argument?
Animations do play out the full duration, and ZOS does not disapprove AC, so when people make the argument that AC needs to be banned because animations should be played out, they're making a selfish argument.
Maybe that line of argumentation makes sense to you, but frankly there's simply no reason to paint someone else's approach to something as selfish. I mean, isn't *that* selfish?
(To add - calling an argument invalid because it's selfish is... well, not really a valid argument against it. I'll grant we really don't care about formal debate around here, but "but that can't be the case because selfish" is a lot weaker than the argument you're trying to defeat).Edited by Starlock on February 27, 2020 8:17PM8 -
Agenericname✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭I stopped skimming when I got to the point where logic is apparently selfish. Really? I mean... really?
Exactly, all people want is for a feature which makes no sense to exist (Why make animations at all?) to NOT grant a tangible gameplay advantage. Were not the ones being unreasonable. its pretty clear who is.
Animation canceling as a whole was intended. That's the reason why skills/abilities were given a priority. Weaving light attacks may have been a side effect, but on the whole there needed to be a priority.
Imagine tanking veteran bloodroot forge and using a heavy attack to recover stamina only to see that the boss', one of the three bosses, animation for their Anvil Cracker had started. Without being able to cancel that, it's a wipe.
As it stands it allows for a certain amount of forgiveness if-you-will to players who are not overly familiar with those scenarios.Edited by Agenericname on February 27, 2020 8:21PM6 -
StaticWave✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭StaticWave wrote: »I stopped skimming when I got to the point where logic is apparently selfish. Really? I mean... really?
Maybe you shouldn't have skimmed. The logic is selfish because skills DO play out the full animation duration. What is stopping them from letting the animations play out? Literally nothing.
Let me make an example so you can understand why I said the logic is selfish. You and I both own a car in a state where car modding is allowed. I want my car to have more speed and look nicer the way I like it, so I mod my car. You, however, think cars shouldn't be modded because it changes how the car originally looks, so you demand the state to ban car modding. Do you see why it is a selfish argument?
Animations do play out the full duration, and ZOS does not disapprove AC, so when people make the argument that AC needs to be banned because animations should be played out, they're making a selfish argument.
Maybe that line of argumentation makes sense to you, but frankly there's simply no reason to paint someone else's approach to something as selfish. I mean, isn't *that* selfish?
(To add - calling an argument invalid because it's selfish is... well, not really a valid argument against it. I'll grant we really don't care about formal debate around here, but "but that can't be the case because selfish" is a lot weaker than the argument you're trying to defeat).
It is selfish because at the current state of the game, you can both let the animations play the full duration, or animation cancel. When you advocate for the removal of AC, you're essentially removing 1 playstyle because you simply dislike it. It's pretty obvious I don't know why you didn't get it. It's literally no different than me asking ZOS to ban bow builds because I simply dislike it. It's selfish and nothing more, period.
I called the argument weak and selfish. It is weak because their reasoning is based off of their personal preference. It is selfish because they want to remove a ZOS-approved feature that is available to everyone, that they dislike. When you advocate for the removal of AC, you have to explain what negative things it contributes to the game, what bugs it may cause. You can't just say AC needs to be removed just because you don't like it.Edited by StaticWave on February 27, 2020 10:13PM10 -
Muizer✭✭✭✭✭
✭@ op
let's get to the meat of the matter:
Do you think cancelling animations should enable players to carry out a follow up action before the moment the animation would have finished if it had not been cancelled?
Please stop making requests for game features. ZOS have enough bad ideas as it is!4 -
MEBengalsFan2001✭✭✭✭✭StaticWave wrote: »
3) This argument is very weak and is extremely selfish. Skills do play out their full duration, so if anti-AC people want to enjoy looking at skill animation, there is literally nothing stopping them from letting the animations play out. What doesn't make sense is trying to force that ideology on players who do want to AC.
4) There are two types of skills in this game, instant cast and channel. With instant abilities, the effect is applied immediately as you press a skill. This means that AC on instant abilities is entirely client side, and has no bearing on the server. Can we make the claim that it is useless to attempt AC on those abilities? No, we cannot, because what AC can do with instant abilities, is to allow you to perform defensive maneuvers with basically zero tradeoffs. That is why the block change is getting blasted so much because the previous version had basically zero weak spots. According to ZOS, "Activating block while animating an ability or attack will now blend the animation more fluidly instead of completely obfuscating the attack. The core mechanics to block cancelling remain untouched, but now display more of the previous attack’s animation before your character animates the block.". While this does not change the core mechanics of block cancelling, it does adds a very small cast time to block because the animation of the previous skill is displayed more. This means that when you block cancel a skill, there is a very small window where you're left vulnerable. It also feels clunky too. On the other hand, channeled abilities only apply the effect AFTER it has completed it's full animation duration. That is why skills like Wrecking Blow, Dark Conversion, Dark Flare, etc. and ultimates with a cast time, will only deal actual damage if you go through its full animation duration. If you attempt to animation cancel channeled abilities, you will cancel it all together and deal no damage. When anti-AC people want it removed because they think AC should cancel the skill and damage all together, they are unintentionally going down a dangerous road here. You see, the only practical way for ZOS to do such a thing, is to give all abilities a cast time like they did to some ultimates. Given how much people hate that change, let me ask you, anti-AC people, do you honestly think it would be a good decision?
Hopefully this post will shed some light on this ongoing topic.
As a FYI I have played other games where the devs did both 3 and 4 at the same time. Specific abilities became channeling to ensure that the animation could not be canceled and the other abilities that were left as instant if you did cancel it did zero damage.
So not trying to burst anyone who like AC bubble but it can be done and it can hurt your damage if you enjoy AC. I know how to play both ways and it doesn't bother me either way. It's called managing through changes. 4 -
theadriel✭✭ZOS embraced it... it was unintentional. But embraced. Anti AC people really cant comprehend what was just said. Its NOT a bug. Every end game pve and pvp was made with AC in accounted for. People who are unreasonable??? You're basically telling ZOS are. To fully remove AC is to make every skill have a cast time or to extend GCD. Like seriously did you not read Op or the countless of real info of why AC is here? The combat will be dull and will be the same to almost all mmos.
Also Combat is the reason why Eso stands out from other mmos. It requires skill. Not point and click.
Even every streamer or youtuber ACs. It's not an exploit or bug. Like I said. ZOS embraced it. I honestly think that most of the anti AC are actually AC without even realizing. Due to lack of knowledge what AC really is.3 -
roflcopter✭✭✭StaticWave wrote: »StaticWave wrote: »I stopped skimming when I got to the point where logic is apparently selfish. Really? I mean... really?
Maybe you shouldn't have skimmed. The logic is selfish because skills DO play out the full animation duration. What is stopping them from letting the animations play out? Literally nothing.
Let me make an example so you can understand why I said the logic is selfish. You and I both own a car in a state where car modding is allowed. I want my car to have more speed and look nicer the way I like it, so I mod my car. You, however, think cars shouldn't be modded because it changes how the car originally looks, so you demand the state to ban car modding. Do you see why it is a selfish argument?
Animations do play out the full duration, and ZOS does not disapprove AC, so when people make the argument that AC needs to be banned because animations should be played out, they're making a selfish argument.
Maybe that line of argumentation makes sense to you, but frankly there's simply no reason to paint someone else's approach to something as selfish. I mean, isn't *that* selfish?
(To add - calling an argument invalid because it's selfish is... well, not really a valid argument against it. I'll grant we really don't care about formal debate around here, but "but that can't be the case because selfish" is a lot weaker than the argument you're trying to defeat).
It is selfish because at the current state of the game, you can both let the animations play the full duration, or animation cancel. When you advocate for the removal of AC, you're essentially removing 1 playstyle because you simply dislike it. It's pretty obvious I don't know why you didn't get it. It's literally no different than me asking ZOS to ban bow builds because I simply dislike it. It's selfish and nothing more, period.
I called the argument weak and selfish. It is weak because their reasoning is based off of their personal preference. You can't just say AC needs to be removed because you don't like it.
ZOS should allow a setting to turn on/off animations, that would cater to both play styles.
Thats the only strong argument we should be making, because these discussions are getting stupid on every end.
Xbox One | NA | AD
GM - OK LOL
Warden Stuff
Ex - Trials Core 1 Runner - Left and couldn't be happier1 -
StaticWave✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭MEBengalsFan2001 wrote: »StaticWave wrote: »
3) This argument is very weak and is extremely selfish. Skills do play out their full duration, so if anti-AC people want to enjoy looking at skill animation, there is literally nothing stopping them from letting the animations play out. What doesn't make sense is trying to force that ideology on players who do want to AC.
4) There are two types of skills in this game, instant cast and channel. With instant abilities, the effect is applied immediately as you press a skill. This means that AC on instant abilities is entirely client side, and has no bearing on the server. Can we make the claim that it is useless to attempt AC on those abilities? No, we cannot, because what AC can do with instant abilities, is to allow you to perform defensive maneuvers with basically zero tradeoffs. That is why the block change is getting blasted so much because the previous version had basically zero weak spots. According to ZOS, "Activating block while animating an ability or attack will now blend the animation more fluidly instead of completely obfuscating the attack. The core mechanics to block cancelling remain untouched, but now display more of the previous attack’s animation before your character animates the block.". While this does not change the core mechanics of block cancelling, it does adds a very small cast time to block because the animation of the previous skill is displayed more. This means that when you block cancel a skill, there is a very small window where you're left vulnerable. It also feels clunky too. On the other hand, channeled abilities only apply the effect AFTER it has completed it's full animation duration. That is why skills like Wrecking Blow, Dark Conversion, Dark Flare, etc. and ultimates with a cast time, will only deal actual damage if you go through its full animation duration. If you attempt to animation cancel channeled abilities, you will cancel it all together and deal no damage. When anti-AC people want it removed because they think AC should cancel the skill and damage all together, they are unintentionally going down a dangerous road here. You see, the only practical way for ZOS to do such a thing, is to give all abilities a cast time like they did to some ultimates. Given how much people hate that change, let me ask you, anti-AC people, do you honestly think it would be a good decision?
Hopefully this post will shed some light on this ongoing topic.
As a FYI I have played other games where the devs did both 3 and 4 at the same time. Specific abilities became channeling to ensure that the animation could not be canceled and the other abilities that were left as instant if you did cancel it did zero damage.
So not trying to burst anyone who like AC bubble but it can be done and it can hurt your damage if you enjoy AC. I know how to play both ways and it doesn't bother me either way. It's called managing through changes.
I mean, ZOS added a cast time to ultimates for the same reason as #3. Lots of people disagreed with their reasoning, but it's their game so what can we do lol.2 -
Runefang✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Agenericname wrote: »I stopped skimming when I got to the point where logic is apparently selfish. Really? I mean... really?
Exactly, all people want is for a feature which makes no sense to exist (Why make animations at all?) to NOT grant a tangible gameplay advantage. Were not the ones being unreasonable. its pretty clear who is.
Animation canceling as a whole was intended. That's the reason why skills/abilities were given a priority. Weaving light attacks may have been a side effect, but on the whole there needed to be a priority.
Imagine tanking veteran bloodroot forge and using a heavy attack to recover stamins only to see that the boss', one of the three bosses, animation for their Anvil Cracker had started. Without being able to cancel that, it's a wipe.
As it stands it allows for a certain amount of forgiveness if-you-will to players who are not overly familiar with those scenarios.
I believe the main argument is for skills to no longer cancel light attack animations. I’m not sure too many people want block to no longer cancel animations given that everybody would die much more often if that were the case. I believe they’d rather animations flowed into block more smoothly.I stopped skimming when I got to the point where logic is apparently selfish. Really? I mean... really?
Exactly, all people want is for a feature which makes no sense to exist (Why make animations at all?) to NOT grant a tangible gameplay advantage. Were not the ones being unreasonable. its pretty clear who is.
And some of us like the fast paced gameplay we get with AC in its current state. Between LA weaving and bashing you can be doing over 120-150 actions per minute which is 2-3x more than your typical WoW rotation. We like that.2 -
Starlock✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭StaticWave wrote: »I called the argument weak and selfish. It is weak because their reasoning is based off of their personal preference.
Are you sure that's what the reasoning is based off of? I think you're projecting something into other people's minds that isn't necessarily there.
In any case, considering *all* reasoning any human does ultimately circles back to personal preference, including your own, I would recommend you come up with a better argument than what you've got. You can do it if you try. Honestly, a simple "I don't agree with this" would be a better argument than "but those people are selfish" which is little more than a personal attack.3 -
Skullderic✭✭✭Been playing this game at a fast pace for 5 years, I suck at AC~ But still it help you to cast multi skill fast. w/ out it casting 3 skill in 6 sec is way to slow. It feel broken right now, skills arent casting have to click mutli times, Sometimes skill take 2-3 sec to cast. Players these days like a Fast play style, slowing a game down is like shooting yourself in the foot. No BS, players will find a fast style game w/ no fast casting.Gert Soem!!5 -
SidraWillowsky✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Good points in general, but you're not making points that haven't been made countless times in the past. Even the most logical pro-AC arguments are going to fall on deaf ears when presented to the anti-AC people. Conversely (because I can certainly sympathize with the anti-AC people and don't want to act like their opinions are wrong), even the best anti-AC arguments are going to fall on deaf ears when presented to the pro-AC people.2 -
StaticWave✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭@ op
let's get to the meat of the matter:
Do you think cancelling animations should enable players to carry out a follow up action before the moment the animation would have finished if it had not been cancelled?
Yes, I think it should. Otherwise it's no different than being stunned, but this kind of stun has no immunity lol1 -
Starlock✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭To clarify, when I and some others have mentioned it that animation cancelling as implemented in ESO doesn't make sense, it's because we want to see in-game visuals match up with what the game is calculating. When there's a good visual match, gameplay feels logical, intuitive, fluid, and realistic. When that doesn't happen, it should be due to lag or performance issues in the game, not baked in to how the game itself works. Most other games I've played operate like this, so it's mainly a basic quality standard I expect games to meet that ESO strangely doesn't. Contrary to strawpersons claiming otherwise, it's not that I or some others want to see animation cancelling removed or that we're "against" it. What we want is logical, fluid, and sensible gameplay and know that if we don't experience that it's because our internet is crap... haha.
From what I understand, some of the changes that are dropping this patch will help with the mismatching and I'm very excited to see how it looks for myself.3 -
StaticWave✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭StaticWave wrote: »I called the argument weak and selfish. It is weak because their reasoning is based off of their personal preference.
Are you sure that's what the reasoning is based off of? I think you're projecting something into other people's minds that isn't necessarily there.
In any case, considering *all* reasoning any human does ultimately circles back to personal preference, including your own, I would recommend you come up with a better argument than what you've got. You can do it if you try. Honestly, a simple "I don't agree with this" would be a better argument than "but those people are selfish" which is little more than a personal attack.
*facepalm* What kind of argument can you make when you say you want the animation to play its full duration? IT IS ALREADY PLAYING ITS FULL DURATION...I think you're intentionally trying to not understand my point lmao.
What would you think if I want the government to take away half of your wealth because I think people shouldn't be richer than others? This line of logic for removing AC is no different than this example.
Edited by StaticWave on February 27, 2020 8:40PM4 -
Starlock✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭StaticWave wrote: »StaticWave wrote: »I called the argument weak and selfish. It is weak because their reasoning is based off of their personal preference.
Are you sure that's what the reasoning is based off of? I think you're projecting something into other people's minds that isn't necessarily there.
In any case, considering *all* reasoning any human does ultimately circles back to personal preference, including your own, I would recommend you come up with a better argument than what you've got. You can do it if you try. Honestly, a simple "I don't agree with this" would be a better argument than "but those people are selfish" which is little more than a personal attack.
*facepalm* What kind of argument can you make when you say you want the animation to play its full duration?
That's not actually an accurate representation what I want to see from this game. See above.4 -
Muizer✭✭✭✭✭
✭StaticWave wrote: »@ op
let's get to the meat of the matter:
Do you think cancelling animations should enable players to carry out a follow up action before the moment the animation would have finished if it had not been cancelled?
Yes, I think it should. Otherwise it's no different than being stunned, but this kind of stun has no immunity lol
If, in real life, I were to swing a stick in a wide arc in your direction, would you expect to get hit before it reaches you? Would you expect to experience the same impact if I halted the moment it stick touches you vs following through with the movement?
Edited by Muizer on February 27, 2020 8:48PMPlease stop making requests for game features. ZOS have enough bad ideas as it is!3 -
roflcopter✭✭✭This thread has the potential to deliver bigly!
GG ZOSXbox One | NA | AD
GM - OK LOL
Warden Stuff
Ex - Trials Core 1 Runner - Left and couldn't be happier0 -
Draxys✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭@ op
let's get to the meat of the matter:
Do you think cancelling animations should enable players to carry out a follow up action before the moment the animation would have finished if it had not been cancelled?
I don’t know if you mean it this way, but the global cooldown means that you cannot cast more “follow up” actions thanks to animation canceling. Everyone has equal access to it.
And for the “making sense” argument, that’s fine that people want animations to make sense. I would agree with that actually. But the changes zos have made so far seem to indicate that it’s either fluid gameplay with canceling, or clunky gameplay where the animations make more sense.
I’ll take the fluid gameplay every time.2013
rip decibel4 -
StaticWave wrote: »@ op
let's get to the meat of the matter:
Do you think cancelling animations should enable players to carry out a follow up action before the moment the animation would have finished if it had not been cancelled?
Yes, I think it should. Otherwise it's no different than being stunned, but this kind of stun has no immunity lol
I have a follow up to this i've wondered. I've seen others suggest outright getting rid of animations (physical movements that add time to a skill, but not the corresponding effect. I.e. If i cast a Hardened Ward, it will be instant without my arm movement, yet the tell tale blue halo of the shield will still animate). I've seen others instantly pounce on this saying this is an MMO not an RPG game. Yet...animation canceling seems to imply an RPG like nature with quick activation and follow ups. The only thing that seems to fairly consistent to explain this discrepancy between the two views is that AC requires skill and timing that isn't across the board for everyone. Whereas if they essentially made AC "built in" for every skill without fancy controller kung fu, then it would level the field in terms of gameplay. Yet...I play other games that are instant and the skill usually implied is positioning, team dynamics and timing and that seems to be an assumed fine thing. I've played for years, done AC for years, read over all the posts and still have a struggle at times understanding this ironclad controversy.0 -
StaticWave✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭StaticWave wrote: »@ op
let's get to the meat of the matter:
Do you think cancelling animations should enable players to carry out a follow up action before the moment the animation would have finished if it had not been cancelled?
Yes, I think it should. Otherwise it's no different than being stunned, but this kind of stun has no immunity lol
If, in real life, I were to swing a stick in a wide arc in your direction, would you expect to get hit before it reaches you? Would you expect to experience the same impact if I halted the moment it stick touches you vs following through with the movement?
Heavy attacks are doing just as you described. If you fully charge a heavy attack you deal significantly more damage than if you were to partially charge a heavy attack, or "medium attack" as people call it. Skills on the other hand, are instant and display the effect value immediately when the server registers that it has been casted. The animation is just client side and for you only. You can cancel it all you want but the damage will display before your animation ends. Just go to a dummy and test and you will see why. Instant skills like surprise attack will display the damage before the animation ends. I don't think making the argument of realism is effective. How else would you implement that in this game without either 1/ give all skills a cast time, or 2/ rework the code so that you get stunned without immunity whenever the server detects block canceling after using instant abilities. Both of these will receive major backlash and will drive even more players away from the game.1 -
Edziu✭✭✭✭✭
✭StaticWave wrote: »@ op
let's get to the meat of the matter:
Do you think cancelling animations should enable players to carry out a follow up action before the moment the animation would have finished if it had not been cancelled?
Yes, I think it should. Otherwise it's no different than being stunned, but this kind of stun has no immunity lol
If, in real life, I were to swing a stick in a wide arc in your direction, would you expect to get hit before it reaches you? Would you expect to experience the same impact if I halted the moment it stick touches you vs following through with the movement?
do we have in real life "minimum travel time" like we have ehre in game? take a look on ranged abilities like nb spectral bow, warden bird, crystal frags and some more
if shoot from ranged it makes sense it have travel time to target to hit it
but how it is funny how it also have "minimum travel time" even if not only your are in melee range of your target...you are literally face to face with lestt than meter of distance and yet these skills doesnt land instantly at your target like every other normal melee insta skill but you need to wait this moment of second before your projectile released just at your target, touching your target before it will actually hit..0
This discussion has been closed.