1 vs 1 Combat

Caerlyr

So, why does this simply never happen? It's a real shame. Combat these days is absolutely about things like stacking multiple destructions behind sensitivity or equally annoying things like soulless rubs behind cement socks. There's just absolutely no skill involved so therefore, let's discuss the problem and determine the why this is currently an issue.

It's like, right now, the arena queue. I've been sitting on it for -days- - Before the last wargames, it was two entire weeks of nothing happening.

So, let's have at it and see if we can work out methods to resolve the issue.

Munsia

I hate wargames, I queue for FFA when I feel like it. I prefer FFA to the wargame system cause it's like ARAM...you have the potential of being utterly screwed

Xenthos

I personally do not have any interest in 1v1 combat, and I know I am not alone in that.

There are some who will, but at this point it is mostly challenging the people who like it. Throwing around "Duel?" or "You are a person I still need to kill, come to Faethorn" to someone who does not really want to is unlikely to result in anything.

To find people, you could possibly try leveraging sparwho; encourage people who are interested to join it, and instead of using the arena go off to a secluded place and have it out. Fighting "for real" might make that mechanic a bit more appealing.

Thoros

The inconsistences and some general mechanics of some classes are what turn people off to 1 on 1 fighting. Inquisition, ectoplasm, sap, bard dodge, SD twists and the final twist are but to name a few annoyances. I don't mind general 1 on 1 fighting but I know it's because of these mechanics other people do. Also theres really no point to be good at 1 on 1 fighting in Lusternia, really. Everything is centered around group combat now.

Thoros

Like, 1 on 1 vrs a Celestian, it's annoying to have to run over and over when you get heretic/infidel cast on you. That's why it deters some folks. Ectoplasm over and over being the Nihilists main form of balancelock can get annoying too, sap is lame, bard dodge is just lol, Sd and their twists are another story..

Lerad

Personally, I no longer think of 1v1 in terms of singular abilities and tactics. Lusternian combat on a small scale, (1v1, 2v2, 1v2 etc) is about knowing how to avoid your opponent's end-game. For example, a bard's endgame is aurics. You avoid it by using shield and gust to break earwort and octave, and moving around. A warrior's endgame is hack down, you avoid it by being faster than them or running when you get to a certain amount of wounds. A monk's endgame is 5mo. You avoid it by spamming tendon or hinders, or running when you sense they are near 5mo. etc. That's in general, of course. When you're actually fighting, you have to take note of the actual guild your opponent is. For example, a Tahtetso's endgame is shattered ankles. You get out before you get regen-stacked or you're gah'tiraksho'd. A nekotai is greenlock. You save power for green or you run before they lock you.

If you have the combat sense to avoid your opponent's end-game, you will never die. The next step is then to perform your own end-game before they can avoid it. You do this by hiding your progress, spamming blackout, or relying on their lack of the same combat sense you use to avoid their tactic.

This is why the meta is speed or vapours. Although the only vapours worth a damn is mugwump hexen, which is speed anyway. Speed wins. You do it before your opponent sees the red alarms telling them to haul their ass out of your firing sights. If you can do that, you get win your 1v1. If you can't, then you will never kill your opponent.

Is this bad? Not neccesarily. This can be argued as the matured stage of a complex combat system, where anyone participating in 1v1 is presumed to have the means, and the knowledge, to pull off their "cheese" be it ecto spamming or timing a double sleep hex throw with pooka and sleepcloud. The winner is the one who can trick the opponent to not avoiding your cheese before you pull it off.

What IS bad, however, is that some of the avoiding of tactics is tied too intrinsically to the archetype or guild. For example, if you want to avoid getting killed by a warrior, you pay a very very close eye on your wounds, and learn to run to catch up on healing applications... or you choose to be an acrobat (monk for bonus advantages) and just laugh at them trying to tendon you. If you want to avoid getting killed by a monk, you need to scrutinize their style and train your combat sense to the point where you can almost instinctively sense when they are at 5mo... or you choose to be a wiccan and run until your pooka is ready for your one-keybind-sleeplock. That there are guilds and archetypes that are so clearly tailored to have an advantage in avoiding or countering other guilds and archetypes mean that 1v1 combat is less about actually playing mind games and tricking your opponent, and more about choosing your opponent in the first place.

Exacerbating that is the burst style, which is universally seen as the hardest to counter. Set up your burst, wait for the timer to tick down, and hit your button at the same time as the echo pops up. You've got a win. Monks and wiccans work on this principle. The idea is that there is a lag time to the burst resolving, the time needed to set it up, during which they are vulnerable. It's a noble idea, but not really applicable because monks have hindering as part of their buildup (Tahtetso being the most egregrious with this) while wiccans can just run until their set up is ready. Guardians sort of work on the same principle, but they are coded differently, with less mana burst, but more of an affliction burst. Celestines have inquisition, and Nihilists have the crucifix balance lock. If they pull it off, you're royally screwed. It's easier to counter these two than wiccans, though.

General cheese tactics, like pfift-aurics or blackout-soulless, or meteor-destro, aren't really a big deal. They can be countered if you know what you're doing.

Munsia

First paragraph summary 'Run, a lot'

Lusternia combat 101 'Learn how to Run'

Lerad

Well, yeah. If you can think of a better defensive manoeuvre than hightailing it to the nexus, let me know.

Munsia

Oh, no I'm not dissing you. It's the truth. I'm making an actual observation. All of Lusternia combat boils down to running. 

Caerlyr

Quote: Although the only vapours worth a damn is mugwump hexen.

Avenging Angel?

Karlach

Personally mechanics totally screws you over against some classes 1v1 that it's simply just not fun. Acro Monks being the absolute worst as a Knight for example.

There's a lot of Rock/Paper/Scissors mechanics to it, and other people are just as selective in who they fight as who you choose.

Silvanus

So much of the large conflict based mechanics are based around group combat. Revolts, domoths, wildnodes, the main sources of conflict never make it possible for a 1v1 atmosphere.

Why is there not more 1v1 combat?

Basically what Lerad said, 1v1 goes to whoever is faster. If its a Mugwump Hexen, it'll probably win, especially if they were smart enough ahead of time to properly time all their ent(s) for a one-off burst, pacifying them a second before their next attack. Other classes are generally just boring 1v1, bards are stopped by gust, warriors are stopped too easily, once a monk hits mo5 you are probably dead, mages have to be in demesne to kill you, druids have to saplock, if fail, spend the next 60 seconds running, repeat until necessary. 

Situations like the Mugwump Hexen don't exist in the organizational conflict game. I would say 95% of combat within Lusternia is group combat that exists within those mechanically created conflicts, where most of the skills are tailored around 1v1 combat. It provides lots of avenues for abusing things over the years. Tramp/Sac, Pfifth/Choke, Inquisition to name the worst. 

This last Ascension, Sidd held onto the staff the entire time. Some things have changed since then, greatpent was nerfed (serpent needed it as well), shrines were nerfed (twice, thank god). But if you have a group that can set pits, a demesne, a bard and a beckoner, you can probably hold against a group twice your size. Combat too often breaks down into a series of king of the hill matches instead of being more fluid and evolving. Group combat becomes pretty frustrating after repeated assaults against any fortress-type defense, considering you still lose too much experience, especially in enemy territory. Thats why raids and small-scale combat have all but stopped over the years, that and free discretionary powers/shrines.

Caerlyr

There's a lot of very good feedback coming from this, but I have to say; are we really resigning ourselves to the fact that it's just never going to happen? Of course, there's always going to be outliers that are difficult to deal with, but most seem confined to specific specs/opponents.

It just seems frustrating is all. Nothing gets learned with the current setup. It's 95% down to whoever has the greatest number of people which really needs addressing.

Like I say, the overhaul will very likely resolve a lot of issues, (along with introducing new ones, no doubt) but in the meantime...?

tl/dr: Nerf inquisition, crux/ecto, sap, outlier dodging and outlier damage. Introduce damage weighting per group numbers.

Synkarin

Number skewing also depends on the difference. For instance, during harmony last night, we had 4 to your 5-6 and won, I heard @Munsia and @Akyaevin won a domoth with just the two of then against superior odds. numbers only matter when it's a large difference and even then, it can be overcome

Silvanus

I think the underlying point Sidd is bringing up is that if you want 1v1 combat, you have to live with the consequence of that fight turning into a 1v5 and having a proper escape plan.

I raided solo this past year more than most (I lost over 40 million essence on deaths) and fought plenty of 1v1s. Most of them were pretty one-sided (Sorry Tridemon!) but I would occasionally get the 30 minute fight where someone runs out of endurance/willpower before its decided.

Caerlyr

If we might just ignore particular aforementioned comments and get the thread onto a positive footing, that'd be great.

Yeah, Silv. It -can- happen and it's rather nice when it does, but let's face it, it's just a real rarity these days and certainly only happens in extremely rare circumstances, i.e. there being such few numbers around on each side. All too often, we are seeing situations where a small skilled group (Thinking the likes of Aky, Thoros & Ollie here) do their raid thing. At times, sure, there's a win, but when there is not, said small group turns from three into half a dozen straight away. Power in numbers, if you will. While, yes, this is an entirely different problem that could be addressed differently, it does serve only to assert just how much of an impact a few extra largely unskilled people can be when they join the fray to do nothing more than autobash people to death.

Like I say, though... That's another issue and one that again, I suspect the overhaul will address. Regardless, the core issue remains where the 'victor' is constantly determined by factors that are extremely difficult to mitigate.

Shaddus

Synkarin said:

Number skewing also depends on the difference. For instance, during harmony last night, we had 4 to your 5-6 and won, I heard @Munsia and @Akyaevin won a domoth with just the two of then against superior odds. numbers only matter when it's a large difference and even then, it can be overcome

Partially that, and partially because our side doesn't know how to focus on people without being led around by the hand. Common sense says to take out the melder and/or the bard. Our side just picks random people and flails at them, while your side concentrates on one target. You've got coordination in spades.

Caerlyr

Yeah, this. Definitely.

Shaddus

For instance, your side knows when to Squall, or scissorkick, or fear aura, or whatever you have to do in order to disrupt our group. Ours rarely does, or even thinks about it.

Synkarin

Want things to change? Then -you- need to change and act the way you want others to.

Awhile back, you jumped me on water, I stood there, threw a shot note at you and then Sondayga and Aerys showed up and I left.

I was willing to fight you 1v1, but it seems you weren't willing to. This is just one of many examples I can throw out regarding you and your willingness to 1v1.

If you want more 1v1, stop bringing groups when people are stepping up. As far as I can tell, you don't really want to 1v1 unless you know 100%, you'll win easy.

Ignoring my comments doesn't make them untrue, it just ignores probably the biggest issue with stated topic. Why should people try to 1v1 you when you just call your friends in each time?

Caerlyr

Can we leave our hate boners at the door and stick to truth, facts and the actual reasoning behind the thread rather than throwing about petty insults and lies? Thanks.

Karlach

Synkarin said:

 Why should people try to 1v1 you when you just call your friends in each time?

There are several people extremely guilty of doing this, and notorious smacktalkers at the same time.

Soon as they're in trouble they call for help.

Synkarin

Except that I haven't insulted you.

I have pointed out FACTS about you that is an overlying issue about 1v1

You don't seem to want to 1v1. There have been opportunities, but you bring friends, every time in my experience. This is a fact.

Be the change you want to see in the world and all that

Dys

How long has SPARWHO been a thing?

Neat!

Caerlyr

Dys said:

How long has SPARWHO been a thing? Neat!

It's been a thing in all of the Iron Realms games for as long as I care to remember

It's just one of those things that very few people know about and even fewer actually use.

Synkarin

Flagging all my posts because you don't like me calling you out doesn't help your cause either

Caerlyr

Anyway, moving swiftly on!

For those unfamiliar with it here, as per the suggestion by Xenthos, here's how things look. (It's actually pretty neat compared to the other games).


                    % of
                    your  Combat  Combat
Name               might    Rank  Rating Guild
----------------------------------------------------
Caerlyr              100     ---     --- Cantors

Rivius

My character is a warrior, and 1v1 as one is very, very fun and challenging a lot of the time. However, there is a very significant portion of the game that has things way easier. So it's easy to get very frustrated when facing many classes. For this reason I tend to enjoy small groups more, since my role becomes simplified and running isn't necessarily throwing me back to square one.

Daedalion

I always respond to 1 vs 1 combat, in fact, I prefer it. When I raid by myself, I bait, sometimes it works and most of the time it does not. 7 vs 1? I leave, not because I don't want to get curb stomped, but because it's just not fun and there is no point if I'm not enjoying it. Sure, you deal with several accusations of being a coward, but common sense is a rare thing these days.

Duels? Never outright rejected one without an OOC reason that prevented me from commiting time. Well, unless you bring other people to jump me.. in a duel you requested.. which -someone- did to me recently and is the reason for half the irony in this thread.

The problem is personality. You either enjoy 1 vs 1 or you don't. Will the re-balancing solve the issue? Some of it, sure. But people who like group combat and people who don't like a chance of dying are always going to jump you with 3-4 of their friends. Do I hardly ever get a 1 v 1 with serens because they don't like ectoplasm? Or could it be because their only goal is to stomp my face in and their enjoyment comes from the direct result (Me dying) and not the battle or the accomplishment of doing it by themselves? I think it's the latter myself.

Point being, this will always be a problem. It will never likely be resolved. Just get used to zergs for they are never going away so long as it's ridiculously easy to kill someone in under 5 seconds with more than 3 people.

Parua

If you raid an org by yourself, you are not going to get only one responder unless there is only one combatant.

The proper response, ICly, to a raid, is to get them out, however possible. Raiding is not a way to get 1v1 combat.

Just sayin'

Daedalion

Then we can just agree that there is no proper way to get 1 vs 1 combat other than spamming market for spars, sending random people tells for duels and the much underused sparwho system. Apparently. Everything else is just a huge group stomp fest and that is the way people want to keep it.