Renewing Blocking Mechanics Ala Matrixexo

[Ronin666]

 

 

 Gameplay-wise, it breaks down and causes a blocking mechanic to be a trolling mechanic. Something I think you might have wanted unintentionally and something we see really clearly as a third-person's perspective on your suggestion.

 

 

Nah, didn't want it unintentionally. Just figured if anyone could implement such a mechanic and make it viable without trolling, it would be DE.

[matrixEXO]

-snip-

Personally, I feel that, besides mechanic, blocking needs the visuals to really show that they ARE blocking. Not flailing their daggers and swords and whatnot in a sort of chinese "huaaa huaaa" move that doesn't portray such an impact. Also, blocking reducing some damage is alright in my books.

 

I don't want to see a stamina-based mechanic that gives full damage mitigation capability. It would also render Iron Skin pretty much a useless skill too, given that you can block 100% of the damage.

 

What Steve actually meant is that one does not tweak stats in a small number but simply jump to the next number in large factors. Such is the way of video games because tweaking numbers in small values may cause a lengthy amount of time to "test" and "re-test" after another tweak. In a sense, crazy means playing around with what you have available and what you can create but not until you enter the realm that it should not be in. An MMORPG that is a text-based adventure game. Who wants one? Not me, that's for sure.

 

Nah, didn't want it unintentionally. Just figured if anyone could implement such a mechanic and make it viable without trolling, it would be DE.

Thought so. BTW, don't think developers can sprinkle pixie dust or cast magic to make wonders. Things work under a constrain or limitation. The one here is known as multiplayer.

[Yefrign]

not a bad idea, right now I dont think anyone uses blocking at all... it is kinda cool that it helps reduce oncoming damage but other than that it drains stamina way too quickly to be of any real use

[Ronin666]

 

Thought so. BTW, don't think developers can sprinkle pixie dust or cast magic to make wonders. Things work under a constrain or limitation. The one here is known as multiplayer.

 

I'm sure you can sprinkle pixie dust or cast magic to make wonders.

 

Dial back the vacuous rhetoric and I'll take you at least half-seriously.

 

It's obvious you know nothing about dev projects, scope, specs, or customer expectation management, so stop pretending you do. Some of us make a living cutting code, and know quite well what is achievable and what isn't.

 

Stick to suggesting ideas as a player and not making assumptions about something you have no experience in, i.e systems or gaming development.

[matrixEXO]

I'm sure you can sprinkle pixie dust or cast magic to make wonders.

 

Dial back the vacuous rhetoric and I'll take you at least half-seriously.

 

It's obvious you know nothing about dev projects, scope, specs, or customer expectation management, so stop pretending you do. Some of us make a living cutting code, and know quite well what is achievable and what isn't.

 

Stick to suggesting ideas as a player and not making assumptions about something you have no experience in, i.e systems or gaming development.

Sounds like you know something. Mind sharing that info. If not, listen to the ones who knows more. At least I source for information about coding and how to write (baby steps aka C++, mind you) and I do know a decent bit about multiplayer and how one has to tie in with another.

 

Ever heard of ping? Know what happens when a person's ping get's high (say 250ms)?

 

Ever heard about lag compensation? Know how it works? Know why it is there?

 

Ever heard of Max Payne 3? Ever played it's multiplayer? Ever wanted to kick the game in the bucket, if you did play it's multiplayer?

 

Son, speak with facts. I played Max Payne 3 multiplayer and I don't like it. And if time can be slowed down by an ally in my game without 'affecting' me (me being host, they being the client connecting to me), it sure as hell would affect me or it would obviously cause a major difference in client versus host data and thus would cause lag compensation to kick in and make your and your teammates' life a living hell.

 

You need to mature yourself into more knowledge related to video games or online multiplayer games, not just games itself. I don't think it's shameful to admit you don't know anything cause I sure as hell don't know game coding but at least I know parts about how multiplayer game works and about how your suggestion would work. Don't know about you though. At least I don't build castles in the sky (I wish I could but sadly reality is a b****).

 

PS: Developers do NOT sprinkle pixie dust or cast magic. It just seems like it to us but in reality, it's just hard slogging through the codes.

Edited July 21, 2013 by matrixEXO

[Ronyn]

Personally, I feel that, besides mechanic, blocking needs the visuals to really show that they ARE blocking. Not flailing their daggers and swords and whatnot in a sort of chinese "huaaa huaaa" move that doesn't portray such an impact. 

I'm not going to debate the nature of the aesthetic choice in this scenario.

 

 

Also, blocking reducing some damage is alright in my books.

 

I don't want to see a stamina-based mechanic that gives full damage mitigation capability. It would also render Iron Skin pretty much a useless skill too, given that you can block 100% of the damage.

Your preferences are your own and that's cool. 

In my view I prefer it does. Much like how a if I evade an attack properly I don't take damage, I want that same reward if I block an attack properly.

 

At any rate, a stamina burning 100 percent block mechanic would not even come close to rendering iron skin useless.

I could go into why it doesn't but really, since you make the initial claim that would, the burden of proof is on you to describe why it does.

Honestly, being able to block incoming damage from the front or being able to resist all effects from 360 degree angle is just not the same thing...

Though they are both defensive actions and would work similarly in certain situations...each has its own moment to shine and falter where the other would not.

 

What Steve actually meant is that one does not tweak stats in a small number but simply jump to the next number in large factors. Such is the way of video games because tweaking numbers in small values may cause a lengthy amount of time to "test" and "re-test" after another tweak. In a sense, crazy means playing around with what you have available and what you can create but not until you enter the realm that it should not be in. An MMORPG that is a text-based adventure game. Who wants one? Not me, that's for sure.

I'd never put words or add meanings to what someone else said but I don't believe that is an accurate depiction of what he meant at all.

The example Steve used on how not to do a percentage shift was the change he made to the aura system.

Steve wanted the Auras to factor in to the mod system as a complete system.

When the aura system costing energy was received poorly and ruined builds he didn't change the amount of energy they took...

He literally turned the effect backwards from costing energy to granting energy.

That is not a percentage change by any stretch of the imagination. That is going the opposite way.

So, using the same pattern of thinking.

Changing the percentage of damage that blocking mitigates is like changing the energy cost that auras take. Doesn't fit the design philosophy.

Making blocking stop all damage or even send damage back out is more akin to going in a truly opposite direction as he did with the auras.

[matrixEXO]

-snip-

As for the philosophy part, I don't think it would really be that true to what needs to be done on it. It does it's job fine by not being a total mitigation while allowing for it to be 'remotely' useful. I think the reason it's underused and underwhelming is because of the fact that blocking does not give you any added benefit to using it compared to running in and going to town on the sod or running away. I still believe that they are just nice as it is.

 

As for why I would see Iron Skin be pretty much useless, it's because even though it would be only from the front, 99% of the enemies ARE from the front and you can always position yourself to have them be in the front. Not only that, using a stamina skill that provides full mitigation to move to cover then regen that stamina so that you can continue blocking would cause it to have a much more extended use than Iron Skin. Obviously, the two together would mean a godlike Rhino but that's another time because I was talking about the mechanics of both full mitigation block and Iron Skin as separate sets. To put it simply, it's like giving a free infinite Iron Skin to every single frame in the game.

Edited July 21, 2013 by matrixEXO

[Ronyn]

As for the philosophy part, I don't think it would really be that true to what needs to be done on it. It does it's job fine by not being a total mitigation while allowing for it to be 'remotely' useful. I think the reason it's underused and underwhelming is because of the fact that blocking does not give you any added benefit to using it compared to running in and going to town on the sod or running away. I still believe that they are just nice as it is.

You say...It does its job fine but doesn't add any added benefit over just running in? Those are contradicting statements.

If its not worth using its not doing its job.

More accurately you're acknowledging that blocking needs something more than what it has now to be worth using.

The difference is that you'd rather it not be full on stopping incoming fire.

 

 

As for why I would see Iron Skin be pretty much useless, it's because even though it would be only from the front, 99% of the enemies ARE from the front and you can always position yourself to have them be in the front. Not only that, using a stamina skill that provides full mitigation to move to cover then regen that stamina so that you can continue blocking would cause it to have a much more extended use than Iron Skin. Obviously, the two together would mean a godlike Rhino but that's another time because I was talking about the mechanics of both full mitigation block and Iron Skin as separate sets. To put it simply, it's like giving a free infinite Iron Skin to every single frame in the game.

I can't agree with anything said there.

1: 99% percent of enemies are not in front of the player. certainly not directly in front enough to be covered by the block simultaneously.

2: When enemies attack from multiple angles it is impossible to position yourself to face all enemy groups.

3: Depending on HOW much stamina blocking takes it is quite feasible that stamina wont replenish fast enough to move between cover points....

without allowing the enemy to advance, re-position and eventually overwhelm this player who is attempting to hide too much being blocking.

4: Frames would have to mod for blocking to get it up to a level where it make that big of difference in their play...

 

Which leads me to the advantages iron skin gives that blocking does not.

1: One can attack while iron skin is up, cant attack while blocking.

2: Iron skin allows the player to melee battle with poison enemies (Such as Poison ancient), move right through abilities like shock waves (used by certain moas and heavies), and otherwise resist AOE based abilities.....all things blocking does not do.

 

You're overselling your point.

Blocking is not a substitute for Iron skin.

[matrixEXO]

-snip-

I did say it did it's job fine while allowing it to be 'remotely' useful, right? As a defensive skill, the problem with how it works compared to running in or running away is just the advantage you get over it. The other 2 are utility tools, while this is the only defensive tool in the stamina-based pool of 'skills'. However, individually, it actually comes out just fine. By looking at it objectively and not comparing it to other stamina-based 'skills', you can see that it serves a decent amount of usefulness.

 

 

1) They ARE, you just don't know how badly they spawn in front most of the time. You enter a room with the alarm already blazing off, where do they spawn? In front of you, in that room itself.

2) I find you real funny. Running to position yourself is possible, my newbie. I have done that many times. In fact, the only times I ever get killed because an enemy is at my back is due to a knockdown effect. Or Grineer Commander, but they are relatively easy kills so whatever.

3) As it is now, taking a fully ranked stamina regen mod will refill your stamina in 2~3s flat. I don't see a reason why we need to bother. Plus, getting to cover is different from moving between cover to cover. My reasoning on this is mainly because you use cover to return fire, not bunny hop from cover to cover while waiting for enemies to miraculously die. Just that you can use the regenerated stamina to start blocking again when needed to while repositioning if you see fit. Tactical plays and placement is key in games like this.

4) Only 1 Stamina Regen mod is needed actually. Rest can be kept the same. Who on earth cannot do that are either hugging all 6 mods of theirs too tightly (inflexible) or just someone who don't know how to change their own builds. I have Thief's Wit on all my frames and have no issues playing it. If I had Enemy Sense (before the Aura patch), I would have taken it too.

 

As for your advantages that Iron Skin gives above blocking, I think you just forgot 1 more stuff:

Iron Skin has infinite duration. This means a 50 energy spent is kept the entire way until it's 'shield' is completely removed.

 

Now that I cleared the benefits out, let's talk about how they actually aren't advantages.

1) That only applies to ranged weapons. Melee weapons can be used while holding the block button and the damage mitigation is still available. And if my suggestion goes through, it means that daggers would allow you to use a non-dual sidearm as a ranged weapon while blocking and thus rendering that benefit useless in most cases.

2) While Iron Skin allows for melee combat against Poison Ancients or crowd control abilities, it's just an added option to movement (reckless movement). One does not need to melee combat a Poison Ancient and one can jump over a Shockwave MOA's AoE. As for Heavies' knockdown smash, one can always bait them into doing so then running outside the area of effect before returning back in. While reckless movement is allowed with Iron Skin, it does not mean you cannot do other things to produce the exact same results.

3) While Iron Skin has infinite duration and only costs 50 Energy that does not replenish without Energy Siphon, blocking consumes stamina while replenishes over time. Additionally, compared to a noticable stamina loss, Iron Skin does not inform you of your remaining shield health and thus can lead to a really bad situation when you engage. Lastly, using blocking would allow you to save that 50 energy into another skill (or on another frame, it can be used for offensive means).

 

I'm not overselling my point. I'm using tactical plays and logical reasonings behind how it can be really strong and wherever Iron Skin can go, a tactical person can easily bypass that same scenario 10x over without it. Full mitigation blocking definitely will substitute Iron Skin as long as you 'learn how to play'.

Edited July 21, 2013 by matrixEXO

[Ronyn]

_snip_

 

Look, what I am trying to do is make blocking stay up for less time but be more effective in the time it is up....make it more impactful!

The point is that blocking isn't good enough right now overall. I want to increase its defensive measures, you want to increase it other ways.

 

1 & 2) Perhaps you misunderstood what I meant by "face".

There are many situations where you cannot turn to face all enemies in a way that the block will be in between their attacks and you. 

Most enemies spawn in front, but to say 99 percent of enemies are in front, depending on the mission type, is an exaggeration.

Regardless while they are in front in the larger sense of in front, they do not fall into the relatively small vector of the block itself.

If a bunch of enemies in the room in front of you start shooting, the player character would not block all of what they send.

To clarify-In my suggestion I'm looking to make block a skill based, timing based, generally aim requiring system...

not something that covers most of your body sort of..but something that covers part of your body very well.

 

And don't resort to calling me a newbie just because we disagree about something. I hit 100 plus hours of gameplay long before we got to Open beta. I'm not even close to one of the guys with the biggest hour count but I'm WAY beyond newbie status.

Such remarks show that you're intent is to feel superior.

You don't need my input to feel superior so if you want to go down that road I'll leave you to do that without me...and put my energy into a different thread. I'm only here to have an in depth conversation for the good of the game. no more, no less.

 

3 & 4) We are talking about what mods would be enough to provide stamina under a modified block system with numbers yet undecided.

Exactly what mods would be needed to do what is not something we can speak about with certainty.

Now I Suggested that blocking should use up a lot of stamina to be effective. So while it will replenish fast (which is effected by one mod) it wont necessarily give you enough stamina pool (which is effected by a different mod) to keep the block up long enough to really re-position.

If one isn't either attacking effectively or re-positioning, like advancing to new cover points or moving closer to the objective, one is giving the enemy too much time to do what they do.

Of course, If when you said "get to cover" you meant "get to cover AND return fire" (which would have been nice to clarify) that is quite a different matter than just getting to cover to hide.

However, one is still capable of being shot while using cover and iron skin would offer resistance in that situation where blocking does not. 

They are different things.

 

Note-That extra advantage you mention wasn't forgotten. I wasn't trying to list every advantage iron skin has. Just get the general point across.

Should we also throw in that iron skin allow a person to walk on fire hazards? lol

 

1)Then I should be clear because we aren't quite talking about exactly how blocking works at the moment but how it would work under our respective suggestions. Under my suggestion -

Blocking,when being used directly, would be greatly effective at resisting frontal damage for a high stamina cost...

but offer no mitigation when not directly being used.

So no, one could not attack while using it in general.

However giving certain weapons ways to temporarily bend that rule is fine.

That is part of the fun of making each weapon unique.

 

2)No, one does not NEED melee to deal with a toxic ancient nor did I say anything of the sort.

The point is that Iron skin grants that particular option where blocking does not.

If Warframe is ever going to reach a deep melee system we can't fall back to "we could just shoot the guy" as a solution for every situation.

Keep in mind that blocking is largely about offering non shooter style solutions to a combat situation.

Shooter games don't generally have blocking (outside of an occasional riot shield)...melee games very often do.

There is a line of reasoning for that.

Following that through-what is reckless is based entirely on how viable a tactic is and the risk/reward associated with it.

If warframe is meant to have deep melee combat, wanting to be in close will have to not be "reckless", but reasonable.

 

3) Correction-Energy won't replenish without syphon OR picking up new orbs, which will be happening when one is actually playing the game.

I agree about the lack of UI cue for iron skins remainder, that is a separate but connected issue.

Honestly, I've given feedback that they should give us a meter or something on that...just as many others have said.

Yes, using my version of blocking would allow a person to effectively close in while saving that 50 energy for later or another action.

That is part of the whole point of having multiple options to close into the enemy.

 

Your reference to being able to use one tactics to bypass the need for another is misplaced in the context of this discussion.

Sure one can bypass the "need" for many features buy using something else through the proper use of logic and tactical reasoning.

That is generally the case but not really the question at hand. 

 

Heck, one could reasonably argue that we don't "Need" blocking to stop incoming damage because we can just shoot the enemy and kill them before they can hurt us. We can expand that to say no frame "needs" forward projectile based powers because we have guns.

I know that would be kind of an extreme example though. lol

If one is lumping all defensive actions together one could try to say that Volts shield would be rendered not "needed" by blocking and ignore all of the differences in the required tactics to use one or the other. Ember and Frost have some defensive aspects to certain powers as well if we want to put them all in the same pot.

If we are going to make it all about distance closing one could say that Ash & Loki don't "need" blocking to close the distance because they have powers that can get us close to enemies. 

Or lets just generalize and say that the flamethrower weapon makes some of embers powers not "needed" ....etc...

 

As long as one changes what tactic they employ they will often not "need" a certain feature to succeed in combat.

If that is the point we can boil down most of the gameplay to a few things because everything else is not "needed"

The reality is that having a few different options to achieve a similar goal is actually a good thing.

 

So lets get back to the question.

The question was whether one thing renders the other useless.....whether blocking renders iron skin useless...

that is simply not the case as they have differences that require a change in tactics, a difference in options. 

To say that my version of blocking replaces iron skin, or that my version of blocking is like giving infinite iron skin to all frames is an exaggeration.

Edited July 21, 2013 by Ronyn

[matrixEXO]

(to summarize) Talking about 2 completely separate suggestions and the only bridge would be just whether complete damage mitigation is needed as well as other examples on how one equipment might render other skills of the same 'type' useless.

Long story short, we aren't talking the same language. I was looking at it as that full mitigation block (and only that) would be a deterrence to the game and how it can and will interact with my suggestions while you were looking at the whole concept of your own suggestions.

 

This means topic needs to be straightened out, so we need to start fresh on this and start talking in a manner both of us knows what we are actually talking about. For me, topic is "Full mitigation on blocking". What about you?

 

As far as your generalization goes, it's relatively true except for flamethrower vs Ember. Ember's skills all apply some DoT on ground effect whereas flamethrower are like the current spectra or flux, it just deals high proc rates over time without any DoT at all. Similar but completely opposite compared to Ember's skills.

Edited July 21, 2013 by matrixEXO

[Ronyn]

Long story short, we aren't talking the same language. I was looking at it as that full mitigation block (and only that) would be a deterrence to the game and how it can and will interact with my suggestions while you were looking at the whole concept of your own suggestions.

 

This means topic needs to be straightened out, so we need to start fresh on this and start talking in a manner both of us knows what we are actually talking about. For me, topic is "Full mitigation on blocking". What about you?

Yes, let's straighten the topic out.

 

A: I am talking about "Full mitigation on blocking" as well.

But we can't make any reasonable assessments about what it does or doesn't take the place of without being specific on how much area it covers, how much stamina it takes and what it's overall combat use is intended to be. As they say the devil is in the details, there are many different ways to implement any feature.

The specific implementation of "Full mitigation blocking" I suggest would be too costly of stamina and too small in directional mitigation in use to replace iron skins specific uses. Some other version of it just might.

 

B: I believe that some of your suggestions and mine are compatible, some are not and some are traveling the same road in different ways.

Where we stand on your suggestions-

1-This is in direct conflict with my overall intent for blocking. I don't believe any melee weapon should be incapable of blocking as I view blocking as an integral part of the potential deep melee aspect of Warframe. Not sure if we reached a place of agreement on that or not really. lol 

 

2-No real conflict with my suggestions. Giving some sort of individual aspect to the block function of each weapon type is a great idea. Though we may or may not necessarily agree on what those unique aspects should be on any given weapon. That could probably use more conversation.

 

3-Some conflict and some agreement with my suggestion. Timed blocking is a great idea that we agreed on, though our ideal after effect was different. We went through that one and came to a good conclusion. No need for further debate.

 

4-No conflict with my suggestions. Enemies being able to block is a great idea. No need for further debate.

 

5-No conflict with my suggestions. Unblockable attacks. Great idea. No need for further debate.

 

Where we stand on my suggestions-

1-No direct conflict with your suggestions as it was just a matter of matching the blocking angle to the camera/crosshairs.

You didn't like this based on the belief that the animation wouldn't look right.

We never reached an agreement there.

 

2-Moderate conflict with your suggestions as this was about how much stamina blocking should cost for it be effective. You spoke against stamina being taken for blocking when not actually stopping any damage, which it turns out I was not pushing for anyway.

No need for further debate.

 

3-No conflict with the timed block aspect of your suggestion but a clear conflict with the resulting counter in your suggestion. Again, we went through that one and came to a good conclusion. No need for further debate.

 

4-No direct conflict with your suggestions as it was about adding some mods to expand on what blocking could do. You were ok with this but spoke against using it at the only solution to the blocking systems flaws,which it turns out I was not pushing for anyway.

No need for further debate.

 

 

As far as your generalization goes, it's relatively true except for flamethrower vs Ember. Ember's skills all apply some DoT on ground effect whereas flamethrower are like the current spectra or flux, it just deals high proc rates over time without any DoT at all. Similar but completely opposite compared to Ember's skills.

 

There are some obvious similarities as well as some pretty relevant differences between all of the things I mentioned....that is what I was illustrating.

The point is that they serve as options and that is a good thing.

Edited July 21, 2013 by Ronyn

[matrixEXO]

-snip-

As far as I was talking, it was just the propagation of full mitigation blocking and not the cost that was included in your suggestion. So, when you actually theorize it, you would be able to see where I was coming from.

 

Now that we are clear on the issues that made us de-sync each other's conversation, I would like to clear something out:

1) I actually suggested a change for Heavy weapon to be able to block but with limitation the similar way the duals have in my opening post. I believe you skipped it. Might want to go back on that.

 

2) My issue is actually only about full mitigation blocking, not full mitigation blocking with increased stamina cost. Personally, I think that the stamina cost is fine as is because it only becomes a real problem after you slap a fully ranked stamina+ or stamina regen+ mod. I wouldn't want the new players to have an issue with blocking 'just because the stamina cost is too high of it to be of any real use' even with the added benefit of full damage mitigation. It's the impression imparted during the early stages of gaming that would affect how people would play the game. Just something you need to keep in mind.

 

3) When the increased stamina cost AND full damage mitigation comes in hand-in-hand, I actually see no theoretical problems to it. But theory does not equal to real life so testing has to be done sometimes.

Edited July 21, 2013 by matrixEXO

[Ronyn]

1) I actually suggested a change for Heavy weapon to be able to block but with limitation the similar way the duals have in my opening post. I believe you skipped it. Might want to go back on that.

Oh no I did catch  it. Thing is that that took us right into the disagreement on exactly how effective blocking should be and what it's goals are....

Specifically you suggested a version of heavy weapon blocking that was very strong in mitigation but at the cost of a stuttered movement and I came back with saying that I felt that would be counter to much the point of blocking in a game that mixes guns and melee...etc...

that's why I was not entirely sure whether we reached a full agreement or what exactly. :)

 

 

As far as I was talking, it was just the propagation of full mitigation blocking and not the cost that was included in your suggestion. So, when you actually theorize it, you would be able to see where I was coming from.

 

2) My issue is actually only about full mitigation blocking, not full mitigation blocking with increased stamina cost. Personally, I think that the stamina cost is fine as is because it only becomes a real problem after you slap a fully ranked stamina+ or stamina regen+ mod. 

 

3) When the increased stamina cost AND full damage mitigation comes in hand-in-hand, I actually see no theoretical problems to it. But theory does not equal to real life so testing has to be done sometimes.

Alrighty. I'm not going to keep pounding on that one. 

And yes, testing is needed to see how a theory works out. No way around that.

 

 I wouldn't want the new players to have an issue with blocking 'just because the stamina cost is too high of it to be of any real use' even with the added benefit of full damage mitigation. It's the impression imparted during the early stages of gaming that would affect how people would play the game. Just something you need to keep in mind.

I most certainly do keep the new player experience in mind,

New players will be experiencing everything in a smaller state than its full potential.

The baseline of everything (weapon,mechanic,power,mod) should be interesting and impactful enough to be useful in itself but offer a greater version once leveled/modded.

 

I even referenced how blocking should feel when not modded "Those who don't slot for it would be able to get good use out of when necessary but it would cost too much stamina to rely on often, preventing it from being overpowered."  to make it clear that ideally its always useful, it can just be made more so.

[matrixEXO]

Oh no I did catch  it. Thing is that that took us right into the disagreement on exactly how effective blocking should be and what it's goals are....

Specifically you suggested a version of heavy weapon blocking that was very strong in mitigation but at the cost of a stuttered movement and I came back with saying that I felt that would be counter to much the point of blocking in a game that mixes guns and melee...etc...

that's why I was not entirely sure whether we reached a full agreement or what exactly. :)

 

 

Alrighty. I'm not going to keep pounding on that one. 

And yes, testing is needed to see how a theory works out. No way around that.

 

I most certainly do keep the new player experience in mind,

New players will be experiencing everything in a smaller state than its full potential.

The baseline of everything (weapon,mechanic,power,mod) should be interesting and impactful enough to be useful in itself but offer a greater version once leveled/modded.

 

I even referenced how blocking should feel when not modded "Those who don't slot for it would be able to get good use out of when necessary but it would cost too much stamina to rely on often, preventing it from being overpowered."  to make it clear that ideally its always useful, it can just be made more so.

Rather, it's actually usable. You may still block but you cannot run forward, just walk forward. Or maybe it should be called 'sprint forward'. My sentencing is bad. Still provides a great amount of boost in terms of functionality but since you can't run, the rest of the stamina is pumped into mitigating more damage. I see it as a good trade given it's massive 'weight' and high mitigation value.

 

I can see how you get there but it has to last at least 5s blocking bullets or else a 1~2s full mitigation blocking technique will and is still going to be considered super underwhelming. That said, 5s of blocking constant barrages is also an overkill since your shields would start regen-ing then and blocking, to me, is not supposed to be a portable frontal cover system. I think you can tell how crazy it is when a co-op of 4 decides to use blocking to cover their teammates while they shoot back and all. It's like having a Loki play tank instead of having a Rhino really go in and tank instead.

 

My problem is the role implementation actually. Because of it, frames needs to remain as they are, frail has to be frail while the sturdy has to be sturdy. An injection of such a system, even though it won't last long enough, will still cause a ton of issues. Imagine if all 4 players were to cycle out as the 'tanker' by blocking and acting as a portable cover while 2 'resting' players will remain shooting enemies from behind the 'shield'. Not entirely possible at any single scenario but still possible. Especially when doing boss hunts.

 

Which also leads to an example I want to give out. Mod effects. Why are they all percentages? Because they wanted to keep a certain aspect of the design intact. Modding a gun that has high fire rate but low damage with a damage mod is less useful than modding it with high fire rate (the return value is always more but disregarding the ammo requirements). In it's own sense, the whole game limits players to the role designations in and of itself. Anything that can be done from the role is negligible, however.

Edited July 21, 2013 by matrixEXO

[Ronyn]

I just want to add....

There is an important difference in feel between the half mitigation and full mitigation systems.

Hypothetical numbers for Illustration-

Let's say the enemies can dish out 100 damage per second.

Example 1-A character using a half mitigation block at a small stamina cost for 10 seconds will block 50% of 1000 resulting in blocking 500 points of damage and taking 500 points of damage.

Example 2-A character using a full mitigation block at a high stamina cost for 5 seconds will block 100% of 500 resulting in blocking 500 points of damage but take no damage.

The reason I am so attached to the second example is that its more solid, more definable, more binary. I either timed things right, blocked and resisted the damage or I timed it wrong didn't block and took the damage. I have less time to hide behind it but get more out of doing so.

Smaller window, bigger reward. That FEELS better to me.

 

Rather, it's actually usable. You may still block but you cannot run forward, just walk forward. Or maybe it should be called 'sprint forward'. My sentencing is bad. Still provides a great amount of boost in terms of functionality but since you can't run, the rest of the stamina is pumped into mitigating more damage. I see it as a good trade given it's massive 'weight' and high mitigation value.

One of the core ideas of what I believe blocking is meant for is closing the distance on an enemy who is firing at you from a distance.

(which ties into the entire history of why melee combat took a backseat to ranged combat as bows & arrows that could be stopped with handheld shields were replaced with firearms & Bullets that would blow through the shields...but that's a long story for another time)

Anyway...Anything that moves against that function is counterproductive. 

Making a persons movement slower while blocking does not help them close the distance. 

 

There is already a delicate balance that has to be found between how much stamina one uses to block while still retaining enough to actually do melee attacks with once in range not to mention whatever other actions one might want/need to perform at any given moment.

Again, I don't think blocking is where we should be looking to find a balance point for the current dominance of heavy weapons.

 

I can see how you get there but it has to last at least 5s blocking bullets or else a 1~2s full mitigation blocking technique will and is still going to be considered super underwhelming. That said, 5s of blocking constant barrages is also an overkill since your shields would start regen-ing then and blocking, to me, is not supposed to be a portable frontal cover system. 

Blocking IS something of a mobile cover system. yet cover is not inherently infallible.

Like all pieces of cover exactly how much punishment it can take and will any bullets bleed through is a very important question. 

 

Stamina cost for blocking should be decided by the amount of damage mitigated.

When looking at an enemy group, there are shots that are high priority to avoid and shots that aren't.

In my view blocking a single railgun moa blast is worth a big chunk of stamina where it should take a decent amount of machine gun fire to whittle it away.

I think it can be very useful if tuned correctly...this gets very much into the specific numbers of things and that is a bit beyond what I would bother to theorize.

 

I think you can tell how crazy it is when a co-op of 4 decides to use blocking to cover their teammates while they shoot back and all. It's like having a Loki play tank instead of having a Rhino really go in and tank instead.

 

My problem is the role implementation actually. Because of it, frames needs to remain as they are, frail has to be frail while the sturdy has to be sturdy. An injection of such a system, even though it won't last long enough, will still cause a ton of issues. Imagine if all 4 players were to cycle out as the 'tanker' by blocking and acting as a portable cover while 2 'resting' players will remain shooting enemies from behind the 'shield'. Not entirely possible at any single scenario but still possible. Especially when doing boss hunts.

Various games offer a class based system where many characters have defensive measure. Generally speaking the squishy ones just can't match the mitigation potential of the sturdier ones (when played with equal skill level of course). 

 

Using alternating block/rest group tactics would be pretty cool to see actually...though I think that would remain limited in use unless everyone modded for that..still that would mean a lot of time is spent with only half the team on the offense.

Such a thing is a trade off that comes with its own tactical cost.

 

Which also leads to an example I want to give out. Mod effects. Why are they all percentages? Because they wanted to keep a certain aspect of the design intact. Modding a gun that has high fire rate but low damage with a damage mod is less useful than modding it with high fire rate (the return value is always more but disregarding the ammo requirements). In it's own sense, the whole game limits players to the role designations in and of itself. Anything that can be done from the role is negligible, however.

The game does certainly limit the frames to certain class roles that we can only stretch so much through mods.

 

Mods are percentages, but many of them are more than just that.

Throw a fire damage mod on a gun and it now does fire damage where before it did not. That's a change in effect not simply a percentage.

From that point one can upgrade the percentage of fire damage.

Likewise, slashdash is a move in itself. Either you have it or you don't.

From that point one can upgrade the damage and range of slashdash.

This is one of the ways that DE adds ACTUAL new things but then expands on them while keeping the design in intact.

Edited July 21, 2013 by Ronyn

[matrixEXO]

-snip-

I disagree with the smaller window, bigger reward scenario because you have to factor in shield regeneration delay time as well. Unnecessary benefits on top of it is enough to warrant a bad design. Instead of the designed 2A = 1B, it's more like 1B + 1C > 2A (going formulas here to show the effect of full mitigation).

 

You are contradicting yourself when you say that mobility is key in this game whilst suggesting to increase stamina cost on blocking, something that is also used in sprinting. As for attacking with no stamina, I don't really see a need to worry about stamina to attack since I always had 0 stamina after attacks and still can melee attack. Blocking is meant to move in for the kill, yes, but it doesn't mean you need to move in sprinting ahead by holding the 'Shift' key as well. Blocking and sprinting consumes stamina, confirmed fact. Given that knowledge, you can tell that it's already designed to not be used always side by side. In fact, the reliance of sprinting while blocking is what you make it out as and it is definitely a wrong image of how it is.

 

Stamina cost based around damage mitigated is both a good and bad thing. You said it indirectly anyway, "if tuned correctly". which means tons of us playtesting it and the devs either getting shelling or more shelling by the community. And a proper balancing factor is hard in this game with zero beta environment to help do these testing.

 

I played many games with squishy classes before. What they lack in protection, they make up in mobility. This means dodging bullets, tricking enemies, etc. That means that you do less blocking or straight-up damage absorption as compared to zipping around the map like a lunatic. LoL is a perfect example of showing it off (ranged adc and their mobility skills as well as the requirement of knowing how to position well).

 

Yes, mods do add a certain benefit to what you have. But the fact is that unlike those benefits, the core design of the weapon itself remains unchanged. "This gun is a high fire rate gun" or "this gun is a high damage per shot gun" will never change and because of that, the percentages reflect it's effect even more clearly.

 

Personally, this game can do without elemental mods. If you want some element, get an elemental weapon or 'inscribe' the weapon with an element that can't be reverted. And enemies have weaknesses and resistances to certain elements so people need to plan wisely when taking a certain weapon in. Right now, because of the elemental mods, the game has 5 (excluding dual mods) direct damage mods in total compared to the remaining mod types. And the fact that you deal normal damage as well on top of it PLUS the benefit of having all 4 elemental mods stacked on each other without negative impact.... But this is just a gripe I have that's minor and not related to our topic of 'conversation' (I don't know if it is, feels like a long drawn debate to me).

 

EDIT: I feel like our 'conversation' is dragging longer every time we post.... weird, huh?

Edited July 21, 2013 by matrixEXO

[Ronyn]

--

Smaller window, bigger reward is still true. In fact knowing that effective blocking allows time to replenish shields is part of that bigger reward.

 

Making block take more stamina for more effectiveness when mobility is required Is not a contradiction... its a trade.

The idea is to know when to block, when to sprint and when to do both. Based on ones build they will have more or less option to do either.

 

LOL is a good example of where squishier characters cant be as burly as tough ones despite their defensive measures.

While true that there is often (not always) a mobility advantage to the squishier ones I am not going against that paradigm by changing blocking from partial to full mitigation. Smaller characters would retain their mobility, sturdier characters retain their extra health/armor, but both can block.

being able to block does not suddenly force a character to rely on it as opposed to acrobatics OR make them as durable as the heavies.

I mean really, a lot of games from fighting to melee brawlers have characters of various health pools and mobility styles yet blocking is a common element.

Back to LOL you'll also notice that there is often (not always) an increased in mobility given to melee characters over ranged characters.

 

Look we can point out the design of all hundred plus LOL characters if we must....not all aquishy damage dealers like ADC carries are very mobile (that's not even getting into mages), and not all tanks and bruisers lack mobility (in fact some are pretty darn good mobile).

We can do that but really, it's not going to come down to some super simple formula of "light=fast and mobile VS heavy-slow and sturdy"  

 

Side note- I reference needing stamina to do melee attacks because in the latest livestream there was a reference to using stamina for some of the potential new attacks. Personally I think that would be a good idea. 

 

I agree that weapons don't suddenly become something they aren't through mods. (Though my hek is modded to be crazy rapid fire!)

Edited July 21, 2013 by Ronyn

[matrixEXO]

-snip-

I'm just saying that it's not proportional. I'm seeing an added benefit on top of it, which is bad IMO.

 

I don't mind it when it is "Here's a function. How, when or why you use it is up to you." but I do mind it when it inhibits the use of other functions by a big margin. Something which is being done through increased stamina cost. It feels as though the game is telling me to choose one and abandon another and that is what you are portraying in the suggestion, "Either block or sprint but both at once is near impossible". Personal opinion here though.

 

In LoL, melee champions need to close the gap to even kill a ranged champion. For that reason, they are given mobility skills to get into the fights easily. Compared to that, ranged ADC champs have better utility skills. Position displacement (Ezreal, Vayne), movement disablement (Varus, Ashe), movement boost (Draven, Sivir) and movement prevention (Caitlyn). All those are meant for the champion to reposition to get a better advantage. Melee champions only ever use their movement bonuses to either jump in or jump out but not to reposition to get a better engagement over the enemy.

 

Because in fighting or melee brawlers, they fight in close combat most of the time. There aren't many brawler that allows one to use guns or extremely fast-firing long ranged weaponry, except for one that I know which is Persona 4 Golden where 1 character called Aegis can use guns but that consumes ammo and majority of the pros don't really use block on her but jumps and positioning (again, where ranged combat is supposed to excel in). Then again, fighting and melee brawl games are all 2/2.5d and thus lack the mobility of the 3d space.

 

Side note - I see. Might be the upcoming melee changes that will allow us to do combo moves? Hope so.

Edited July 22, 2013 by matrixEXO

[Ferriwind]

Blocking + dodge roll = Stamina heavy maneuver?

like with dual wield, it becomes a tumble into a wide low slash or single swords become a duck into a low slash

[matrixEXO]

Blocking + dodge roll = Stamina heavy maneuver?

like with dual wield, it becomes a tumble into a wide low slash or single swords become a duck into a low slash

? Sorry, was I missing something? I can't make any sense of what you are saying. Are you saying that dodge rolls are supposed to be some sort of evasion mechanic that consumes massive stamina or something? And that it links into a low melee attack or something?

Edited July 22, 2013 by matrixEXO

[Ronyn]

I'm just saying that it's not proportional. I'm seeing an added benefit on top of it, which is bad IMO.

I'm going to have just let that be because without seeing some specific implementation at work and how the numbers crunch I cant go any further than express an idea..

 

I don't mind it when it is "Here's a function. How, when or why you use it is up to you." but I do mind it when it inhibits the use of other functions by a big margin. Something which is being done through increased stamina cost. It feels as though the game is telling me to choose one and abandon another and that is what you are portraying in the suggestion, "Either block or sprint but both at once is near impossible". Personal opinion here though.

 

I prefer mechanics that have impact but come with a cost.

If I'm blocking, I want the bullets to be bounced off/deflected and not just bleed through for some percentage of damage.

Likewise If I'm sprinting, running off wall's and fliping through the air I expect my enemies to miss more of their shots than if I just move forward.

(Leads into a separate issue I have with how acrobatics/evasion techniques have too little of an effect on the enemies ability to hit)

Either one of those tactics should be effective at closing the distance buy themselves in the average situation.

Combined they should allow for some awesome advancement opportunities through some wicked heavy fire.

 

How often and for how long one would be able to combine them will depend on how they have been built.

Is a brand new warframe going to be able to pull off both blocking and sprinting at the same time for more than like a second? nope.

But then the new player experience is based towards less combinations of actions anyway.

On the other hand a maxed out frame is capable of a lot of things based on what mods are set up.

Iv'e modded sooo much stamina pool and regen on my frames at times that they could literally triple the cost of blocking and I'd still be able to block and sprint simultaneously through the entire length of most rooms.

This all comes down to specific numbers-

but the underlying philosophy I'm after is more impact for higher cost to each mechanic.

 

In LoL, .....

I really don't want to get deep into LOL tactics. That is its own can of worms.

My two points- 

that 1) mobility is often the key to closing into distance for melee AND 2) that squishy isn't always paired with mobility/sturdy isn't always paired with lack of mobility-

are quite clearly illustrated in LOL as they are in many others.

 

Because in fighting or melee brawlers, .....

I was referring to every melee focused game genre out there from "melee action games" like god of war/ninja gaiden/devil may cry to "fighting games" like Soul caliber/street fighter/Maximum anarchy. Fighting is done at many ranges depending on many things. Leading us back to...

Blocking, mobility, HP levels and many other factors all had their place.

 

We can take that a step further and look at a game like Unreal championship 2.

That is a game that combined successfully Unreal style gunplay/ranged combat in a full on, synergistic, balanced way with melee weapon combat.

They had characters of various sturdiness and base movement speeds, a Block mechanic that was full mitigation but didn't last too long, and it didn't slow down anybody while they blocked.

[matrixEXO]

-snip-

Indeed, number crunches needs to come up to know how strong it would mix together.

 

Unfortunately, the Ai currently have insane 'skills' and almost always hit you. Plus this isn't a video game with projectiles traveling at slow rates, this is a game where 75% of the guns are all hitscan (which is sad cause I'd rather have a sniper with 1000m/s bullet speed compared to an smg-ish weapon with 250m/s).

 

Unfortunately, for a newbie to not be able to pull off those moves for even more than a second would actually be a disaster. The current stamina system never had a gain in stamina points when we level up, for good reason. All the moves are balanced out and any single player who goes into the game can do every move that consumes stamina. To limit this action is the same as calling for a stamina point boost on frame leveling. I don't find it any good when the player is limited from using his tools because he does not have X or Y mod. A player should be limited by how he handles a scenario rather than the mod itself.

 

Wait what? God of War has BLOCK!? I know he has dodge roll but block??? As for Ninja Gaiden, never played it. Devil May Cry in the same scene as God of War. Unfortunately, we can never take most fighting games into point because they are 2D and thus lack that 3rd dimension to equate. Straight forward attacks can't be dodged so blocking is a mechanic added into it nor were there cover. Anarchy Reigns, haven't played it. Supposed to be a 3D fighting game but reviews were... bad for me to ditch it.

 

Never played UC2. Need to see it.

[Ronyn]

Indeed, number crunches needs to come up to know how strong it would mix together.

Cool.

 

Unfortunately, the Ai currently have insane 'skills' and almost always hit you. Plus this isn't a video game with projectiles traveling at slow rates, this is a game where 75% of the guns are all hitscan (which is sad cause I'd rather have a sniper with 1000m/s bullet speed compared to an smg-ish weapon with 250m/s).

The AI is indeed kind of aim botting right now. lol

Luckily, for acrobatics to increase bullet evasion capability the enemies don't need to fire slow projectiles.

Enemies can be made to miss an evasive player more often by being programmed with a certain delay in re-centering their aim.

Essentially, when faced with fast acrobatic movement, the AI would end up shooting where we WERE instead of so accurately where we ARE.

 

End result-acrobatic players get hit less.

 

Unfortunately, for a newbie to not be able to pull off those moves for even more than a second would actually be a disaster. 

Say what? What moves are you referring to? Newbies are able to get through the early parts of the game right now without blocking AT ALL.

We both know a lot of new players aren't even aware that blocking exists. To act like without being able to simultaneously block and sprint would suddenly be disastrous is a baseless statement.

 

Theoretically, after whatever changes are made to enemies with the inclusion of the block system, not blocking could be more detrimental than it is now...but a large point of a well designed new player experience is that it doesn't expect the player to properly utilize all of the systems.

Not to mention I am suggesting improving the blocking mechanic to have more more effective by itself when used properly.

 

The current stamina system never had a gain in stamina points when we level up, for good reason. All the moves are balanced out and any single player who goes into the game can do every move that consumes stamina. To limit this action is the same as calling for a stamina point boost on frame leveling. I don't find it any good when the player is limited from using his tools because he does not have X or Y mod. A player should be limited by how he handles a scenario rather than the mod itself.

In my suggested implementation all of the options are available they are just limited in how much/for how long they can be used.

Lets be clear-How much a player can use his tools is already limited based on mods.

The goal is and has always been that each mechanic should be useful at base level but have a lot of room to grow.

The answer, once again, comes back to the specific number crunching.

 

Wait what? God of War has BLOCK!? I know he has dodge roll but block??? As for Ninja Gaiden, never played it. Devil May Cry in the same scene as God of War. Unfortunately, we can never take most fighting games into point because they are 2D and thus lack that 3rd dimension to equate. Straight forward attacks can't be dodged so blocking is a mechanic added into it nor were there cover. Anarchy Reigns, haven't played it. Supposed to be a 3D fighting game but reviews were... bad for me to ditch it.

 

Never played UC2. Need to see it.

Yes, God of war has block. Well I have played every one of them except the latest outing on the PS3-ascension.

Its possible that particular one does not.

Devil may cry, depending on which one we are speaking of, does or does not have a "block" (royal guard in 3,4), most have a "parry"(timed sword strikes in general/also devil bringer in 4), and all have some inherent high speed distance closing tools like the Stinger.

Ninja gaiden's doesn't allow movement during the block animation but one can enter some super quick ariel movements around the area in little time. On that note I'd be open to less mobile blocking actions in warframe if we were going to offer more extreme mobility options..though that can open up its own can of worms for pvp.

In 2D fighting games things can actually be dodged, jumping and ducking are commonly used for that. Though i do see why they are different than 3D games.

Anarchy reigns wasn't great overall but it doesn't change my general point.

If you aren't familiar with UC2 I recommend it as a point of study it is a great attempt at melee/shooter hybrid gameplay.

 

Seriously though....getting into each specific example is unnecessary. I only referenced those particular examples because they were off the top of my head. I was pointing out that melee based games in all of their GENRE's far and wide showcase that blocking doesn't negate the relevance of how sturdy or squishy a character is.

 

This debate gets weird sometimes because it falls into the minutia and gets away from the initial points.

[matrixEXO]

-snip-

Sorry, I love minute details cause it gives me the understanding of the clearer picture sometimes.

 

Or the AI could just not auto-snap onto enemy Tenno as quickly as right now. Re-centering the aim actually has nothing to do with aimbotting since it already 'locks' the crosshair on a person. It's recoil 'removal' that causes them to be able to hit so dead accurate at the same places all the time.

 

When the new tutorial to teach the mechanics comes out, newbies will be more aware than before. If you were to think that newbies will never learn how to do anything would be an understatement. Even one who just sifts through the binding menu would be able to see the 'Block' command. What you are theorizing is that they are all dumb (OK, not quite true on this) and don't make an effort to experiment or find it out by accident and that DE would leave the tutorial as it is, incomplete.

 

It being disastrous is a semi-baseless statement. The fact that it's baseless is due to the nature of some gamers to not experiment and try things out. The fact that is based is because when you experiment and see an experiment last for only 1s, you would go 'Hmm, so I can block AND run but only for 1s. Not gonna do this ever because it consumes too much stamina for no real purpose.'. As for changes to be made to enemies along with the blocking system rework, I doubt it will happen in a good way. You are looking way too far ahead. It's possible they might add guarding to AI melee units but other than that, I don't see any real coding that would improve enemy AI in the short term scenario related to blocking (1~2 yrs).

 

I can wallrun for more than 6s (horizontal wallrun the best way to check) without any stamina mod. Do we need to nerf wallrun to 2s, whilst adding ghosting and disablement of enemy AI to auto-aim, without stamina mods? You get how crazy it sounds but it's about similar to how you suggest it by saying that players are limited by the mods he use, which is not true and causes dislike for these functions because, though they can do better than just running, are just too restrained to allow most people to even remotely like it. Mods improve how a player can act but should not be the turning point of the usability of a skill inherent to any player.

 

Then I must have forgotten most of it. I played all DMC games (except the reboot) and non-handheld God of War games and when I play it, I never block. Both games I play by moving a lot and dodging any incoming shots because blocking is a waste of time when I can hack and slash more of them to pieces (or get hacked and slashed because of wrong timing). Definitely need to check UC2 out.

Edited July 22, 2013 by matrixEXO