POLL: IF new ARENA game: CRIT yes or no?

[Deleted]

Hey.

We are developing a new arena only based game. Imagine something that looks like wow arena game, without gear with stats etc. No outside world, only arena. All the stats are class and talent based.

ATM, we are torn up on whether we should include crit chances on some spells or no. Critting can be fun, getting a nice feeling when something crits, can create new spell mechanics but can also be frustrating and RNG when you lose because both enemy players critted twice on you and you died.

So i just wanna know your honest opinions. ATM Crit is the only RNG thing in this game.

Thanks so much for your feedback!

Edit: crits in this game are 50% stronger than normal attacks

[Linkedblade]

Perhaps like on ability use only. Passive crit is too RNG and luck based. But active crit helps make gameplay more interesting. Say a ranged uses an ability that makes another ability crit. The other player can use a defensive ability to mitigate or counter.

[Stormspellz]

50% crit is fine, 100% as we have seen just no.

[Hraklea]

The amount of RNG you can include in a game has a direct relation with how long is a match. If you design the game matches to last 30 secs, RNGs are fun; if the matches are going to last 20 min, losing to a bad luck streak sucks.

[Deleted]

What if there was no crit but all damage values would be like 50-100 points instead of 75. Ie. "fireball" would do 50-150 points of damage and backstab would be 80-90. Or something. IIRC some old game (D2?) had it like fire damage was always like 1-299 and frost damage was 150-160 etc.

[Racthoh]

crits suck, have you played pokemon

[Deleted]

Thanks all for the replies and feedback.

What if there was no crit but all damage values would be like 50-100 points instead of 75. Ie. "fireball" would do 50-150 points of damage and backstab would be 80-90. Or something. IIRC some old game (D2?) had it like fire damage was always like 1-299 and frost damage was 150-160 etc.

Good point, but the baseline thing is: should there be a RNG aspect to the dmg or no? the D2 thingy is rng based same as crit, so its fundamentaly the same thing.

The amount of RNG you can include in a game has a direct relation with how long is a match. If you design the game matches to last 30 secs, RNGs are fun; if the matches are going to last 20 min, losing to a bad luck streak sucks.

The games atm last around 3-5 minutes as far as i know.

[Deleted]

crit has got to be the worst stat in any game that's supposed to be competitive and balanced

[Kaldreno]

If you ask TF2 players most will say random crit is the devil.

[trevoroxx]

crits suck, have you played pokemon

Reason why mega slowbro is such a beast cm booster, shell armor = immune to crit.

On topic, I like the rng... It's discouraging to newerr players to get trounced by "skill"

Without RNG you get people playing with a calculator next to them, or landing "the right CC chain," or other things that make the game less exciting and feel more mechanical... Almost like homework... I don't see skill in this moreso just memorizing and executing. RNG provides opportunities for sudden shifts in momentum where you have to adapt on the fly.

But I understand some people like to play games like that (anyone playing arenas at a high rating would have to) so I guess it depends on your target audience.

Edit for other thoughts while in the shower:
In regards to wow, it would be interesting if strong CC moves like poly cyclone and fear had something like a 80% hit chance. Or if their durations werent a gauruntee (meaning aside from drs and racials), similar to buddy saying damage should have a variance, if your poly was going to last anywhere from 3-8 seconds on the first cast for example.
Just spitballin

[Deleted]

Reason why mega slowbro is such a beast cm booster, shell armor = immune to crit.

On topic, I like the rng... It's discouraging to newerr players to get trounced by "skill"

Without RNG you get people playing with a calculator next to them, or landing "the right CC chain," or other things that make the game less exciting and feel more mechanical... Almost like homework... I don't see skill in this moreso just memorizing and executing. RNG provides opportunities for sudden shifts in momentum where you have to adapt on the fly.

But I understand some people like to play games like that (anyone playing arenas at a high rating would have to) so I guess it depends on your target audience.

Edit for other thoughts while in the shower:
In regards to wow, it would be interesting if strong CC moves like poly cyclone and fear had something like a 80% hit chance. Or if their durations werent a gauruntee (meaning aside from drs and racials), similar to buddy saying damage should have a variance, if your poly was going to last anywhere from 3-8 seconds on the first cast for example.
Just spitballin

Thanks for the post and the suggestion, but i think that your second suggestion is way too RNG for an arena based game. The last thing you want is an unreliable CC, that would frustrate people even more. It was like that in Vanilla when sheeps and fears could randomly break after a few sec, and i remember it was just... weird.

[zoefschildpad]

I suppose it depends on who your audience is. If you're building your game for ultra-competitive esports, it's probably not the best idea to include too much RNG. Since you're posting here for advice I have to assume that's not the case. Crits are fun, but you should limit their impact. I would suggest limiting crit to some classes/characters. Be particularly careful of characters with huge, single hit attacks. If thopse crit the impact is massive. If you have a class that does lots of small hits, like a rogue, you can safely give them a 50% crit rate and nerf their damage to compensate, because apart from extremely unlikely lucky streaks it will never make a serious impact.

Anyway, the best suggestion will always be to just try it out. If it doesn't feel good in beta you can always remove it.

[Deleted]

Instead of crits. Just fixdd dmg and the visuals can look like crits depending on the relatieve dmg done.

[Deleted]

I suppose it depends on who your audience is. If you're building your game for ultra-competitive esports, it's probably not the best idea to include too much RNG. Since you're posting here for advice I have to assume that's not the case. Crits are fun, but you should limit their impact. I would suggest limiting crit to some classes/characters. Be particularly careful of characters with huge, single hit attacks. If thopse crit the impact is massive. If you have a class that does lots of small hits, like a rogue, you can safely give them a 50% crit rate and nerf their damage to compensate, because apart from extremely unlikely lucky streaks it will never make a serious impact.

Anyway, the best suggestion will always be to just try it out. If it doesn't feel good in beta you can always remove it.

Thanks! really great feedback!

[Zelendria]

Crit takes away the predictability of what you're doing. Crit is like a lucky headshot that turns a fight.

If you know it takes exactly 3s to kill a particular foe and you have a 3s stun it's not exactly much fun. If you know it takes 6s to kill on a 3s stun, but you might catch a crit, now you're playing the percentages.
You might have a case where you need a crit otherwise the fight changes dimension, and you don't get it.

If dmg/healing is totally predictable then outcomes start to become predictable

[zenga]

Crit is only a meaningful stat (just like block, parry, reflect, etc ...) if you can make reasonable stat decisions yourself. By reforging, gems, talent decisions, ...

[Knolan]

Crit is only a meaningful stat (just like block, parry, reflect, etc ...) if you can make reasonable stat decisions yourself. By reforging, gems, talent decisions, ...

^ This.
My problem with a game that has not critical is that it would seem to me as a game without depth. It is the same as comparing WotlK WoW with nowadays WoW. A lot of people like the new system better, I think it is far too simple to be enjoyable.

Finally, kinda off-topic: wasn't bloodline champions trying something in those lines?

[Deleted]

^ This.
My problem with a game that has not critical is that it would seem to me as a game without depth. It is the same as comparing WotlK WoW with nowadays WoW. A lot of people like the new system better, I think it is far too simple to be enjoyable.

Finally, kinda off-topic: wasn't bloodline champions trying something in those lines?

Yeah BLC did that, and i played it a lot, and it didnt feel shallow. It felt pretty good without RNG if you ask me.

[Sharde]

i would not include crits as a chance.

but the feel of a nice crit could be emulated by ability combos. like shatter combos. frozen and the next spell deals double damage. or a flashy animation when someone is killed with a high damage ability.

basicly combos or cooldowns that enhance abilities to feel more chunky and impactfull.

it is pretty much just an optical thing with some additional satisfying sounds. this is mostly irrelevant for the gameplay but a bigger number in another color and spashy chopping sounds are less boring than just a static reduction of health.

crits are more about feeling awesome and should be included in such games imo. doesn't mean they have to be random.