MMO MMOnkey: Comparing active attack and auto attack
Filed under: Age of Conan, Game mechanics, PvE, Opinion, MMO MMOnkey

The earlier column had nothing to do with styles of combat but all the combat-related comments got me thinking about some of the differences between active and auto attack. The two types of combat appear to have few, if any, important differences for the experienced player at the operational level (deployment of unit or squads in raids) or the strategic level (player-controlled access to important game resources as in EVE Online, Dark Age of Camelot and possibly Warhammer Online). When we look at game mechanics and individual unit tactics, however, important and potentially interesting differences begin to emerge.
Most game designers treat fighting as the fundamental activity in an MMO with the result that combat systems are typically both rich and varied. Different classes can have markedly different combat styles. Some classes bash in the enemy's head and get drenched in blood, some run the enemy around in circles whittling them down as they go, while still others nuke at a distance. Combat can also differ radically depending on whether you're playing solo or in a group. In addition, there's the immense difference between fighting a human opponent in PvP and a computer-controlled opponent in PvE. In order to keep the discussion manageable within the confines of a column like this, I'll limit consideration to solo PvE melee combat in fantasy-based MMOs.
The basic difference between auto and active attack takes place at the level of game mechanics. In an auto attack system your character will continue to attack the opponent once you instigate combat. Depending on the number and strength of the opponents, you may survive the encounter after having done nothing other than start the fighting. In an active attack system the player must instigate each individual attack. If you click on the opponent once and then don't do anything else you will either win with a one-shot kill or get your ass hammered into the ground.
If that were all there was to it, active attack would have the clear advantage over auto attack. Doing something is always more interesting than pressing a key and then watching the game play itself. But that's not all there is to it. Auto-attack systems have become very sophisticated by giving the melee character an arsenal of spells and special attacks that give the player plenty to do during combat and move the discussion from the realm of game mechanics to tactics.
If there is an important difference between active and auto attack, it lies at the level of single-unit tactics. In most auto attack systems, tactics comes down to managing both a resource such as stamina, energy or mana that powers special attacks and the special attacks' cool down timers. An additional layer of complexity is added in some systems by buffs or debuffs that set up a subsequent attack. Players will typically settle on a series of attacks that produce high amounts of damage and allow the player to launch a steady stream of new attacks as cool downs end and the attack resource replenishes. The result is that the player is almost constantly engaged by pressing keys during melee combat.
Age of Conan's active attack system is built on a directional attack mechanism. Attacks can be made from the right, left or center with each direction being controlled by a different keypress (the default keys are "1", "2", and "3" for left, center, right, respectively). Special attacks in AoC are called combos. The player launches a combo with a keypress after which a sequence of directional attack icons appears on the screen. If the directional attack keys are pressed in the correct sequence, the combo is executed. Combos have a resource cost and cool down timers and, as is the case with the auto attack systems, tactics mainly involve managing the resource and the timers so that a steady stream of special attacks can be launched.
If you look at this in terms of the player's engagement with the combat system, auto attack and AoC's active attack are very similar at the level of individual unit tactics. In both systems the player is more or less constantly engaged during combat as they execute a sequence of keypresses in a specific order. Players will typically find a series of special attacks that best balance resource management and cool down timers and execute that series at the beginning of combat much of the time. There are always exceptions but the first three to ten or so keypresses are often the same whenever you engage in combat with a mob. You execute your favored string of special attacks and then decide what to do next based on the outcome. The key sequence differs from game to game but whether you're using AoC's active attack or a different game's auto attack you almost always begin combat with an unchanging sequence of keypresses that becomes more or less automatic over time. If you stop launching attacks, different things happen in the two systems. In active attack you die, in auto attack you may win the fight as your character continues to bash away at the enemy. However as long as the player remains an active participant in the combat, there isn't much difference between the two approaches. At least insofar as active attack is currently implemented in Age of Conan.
It doesn't have to be this way. Combat in both auto attack and AoC's active attack is less engaging for the player than it could be because typically you don't have to react in any way to what the opponent does. You run through the same series of special attacks all the time because it's fairly successful no matter what kind of enemy you're facing or what kind of attack it's using. You can usually ignore what the enemy is up to while you cut it down.
The solution to this problem is a system that asks the player to respond to changing combat circumstances as they occur. Surprisingly, Age of Conan takes a welcome step in this direction with their use of shielding and then abandons it. In AoC computer controlled enemies have three shields that can be deployed in different configurations. The shields can be spread evenly against left, center, and right attacks, two shields can be deployed against attacks from one direction leaving another direction with one shield and the third direction undefended, or all three can form a bulwark against attacks from a single direction leaving the other two directions vulnerable. Basic weapon damage (called white damage) is inversely related to shielding. Attacking against three shields does very little damage; attacking against no shields does a lot. The brilliant thing about the way AoC implemented this system is that the enemy shifts its defenses in response to your attacks. This means that the sequence of attack keys the player presses doesn't become automated. In order to attack effectively the player must react to developments that take place during combat by changing the direction of attack as the enemy changes its shield configuration.
In terms of player engagement, active attack plus changing shields is a great idea. Unfortunately, Age of Conan does not carry through with it for combos. The sequence of keys you press to execute a combo is unrelated to the opponent's shielding and combo damage is usually much greater than white damage. This means that as your character develops and you rely more and more on combo damage, you quickly get to the point where you ignore shielding completely as you launch combo after combo at your enemy. The result is that combat is much more engaging for the player at early levels when you are relying on white damage and are reacting to changing shield configurations than it is at later levels when shielding becomes largely irrelevant.
There are several ways in which Age of Conan could have enriched their active attack system by keeping players focused on reacting to changing circumstances during combat. Combos have levels. When a combo goes up a level the pattern of directional keys you press to launch the combo changes. However, at any given level the direction keys that launch the combo do not change. It's always the same sequence. A simple method of eliminating the problem of an automated attack sequence would be to randomize the direction keys every time a combo is launched. The player would be more actively engaged with combat because he wouldn't know which keys he needed to press to complete the combo until after the combo was launched. A system like this could be made even more engaging by putting timers on the combo's direction keys. As the combo increases in level, the player is given less time to press the key. If the player responds within the time limit for a level X combo, they do level X damage. If they're too slow, they do level X-1 or X-2 damage.
Another way to make Age of Conan's active attack more engaging would be to allow combos to be affected by shielding. Add a keypress controlling the direction of attack to the sequence needed to execute a combo. The combo sequence would then be (a) launch combo, (b) direction of attack, (c) . . . (k) (randomized) combo keys. Combo damage is then scaled like white damage by the enemy's shields. In a system like this the same key always launches the combo but all the other keypresses depend on the current situation (assuming the combo keys indicated by (c) . . . (k) are randomized).
At the simple level of game mechanics active attack is more interesting than auto attack because it demands that the player respond or die. Players don't usually play at the level of game mechanics, however, and in terms of player engagement at the tactical level there's very little difference between active attack as currently implemented in Age of Conan and auto attack. But it's early days yet. Active attack has the potential to become much more interesting if attack systems are developed that keep the player responding to conditions that change throughout combat.
















Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Iconic said on 4:40PM 7-10-2008
You know who has got "active combat" systems down pretty well? Fighting games like Street Fighter or Tekken.
With a lot more work, AoC's system could have had at least some of this sophistication, and then it would have been a very worthwhile system. If combos were more of a freestyle chaining of moves that each had a purpose, they could be interactive and fun. Instead it's like playing a fighting game where all of the combos are "canned" and there's no ability to block, dodge, or reverse an attack.
In a word: terrible.
Reply
censorman said on 9:13AM 7-11-2008
someone doesn't play conan.
What makes it great isn't the auto-attack, it's the range based attack.
In boring MMOs, if I attack you, there is nothing you can do. It connects. Gear based > Skill based.
In fighting games and AoC, if I start an animation and YOU PAY ATTENTION you can double-tap-back and get out of the way OR parry with active blocking. Breaking it down for our spoon-fed slow WoW fanbois. "If joo is 1337, joo can haz pwn n006z"
Watching animations, having opponents waste their combo ender, combo-jousting, active blocking, using your movement-triggered buffs....man, AoC has soo much more than auto-attack. Not shocked small minds focus on one aspect.
This said, man, AoC is a shit game. So damn broken. Sure WoW was bad to start....but not this bad. If not for this awesome combat system, I'd put MMOs on hold entirely till Lich King.
Jack Ratched said on 5:14PM 7-10-2008
Interesting and well thought-out take on active combat. I realize that it is outside the scope of your article (solo PVE) but I found that the most interesting aspect of AoC's active attack system was the newfound importance of positioning your character so most or all of your attacks strike adjacent enemies; every swing of the weapon is an AOE attack of sorts, and whether your mighty sword swing is just a glancing blow off a single enemy, or is a encounter-ending arc of death slashing through three enemies and decapitating a fourth is all a matter of positioning and timing.
I don't think I'm being unfair when I say that the combat in AoC is an interesting and daring departure from the standard-fare MMO autoattack, but falls a little short of setting the new standard in MMO combat. I hope a lot of creative folks at Funcom and other studios take a look at AoC's combat, because it is refreshing and shows a lot of promise
Reply
pizzini3000 said on 5:24PM 7-10-2008
The way you describe AoC's combat is a little bit off. Even when you are chaining combos, you do not ignore the shields. The combo's damage is treated as though its all on the one "side" of the enemy that the last/first direction of the combo hit. If you unleash a combo that starts/end on the right, and they move all their shields to the right, you just wasted that combo. Many times, when the opponent shifts their shield to the direction my really long combo is going to hit, I will stop the combo, and start doing one that hits elsewhere. (otherwise that combo would have done little else than the secondary effects. the damage would have been moot)
Reply
cpeart said on 5:33PM 7-10-2008
so at 80 when all your attacks take 6+ keystrokes, in your randomized system a single mistake wastes the power's stamina requirement and its cool down, whereas a mage clicking just one button would have an even greater advantage in speed and the ability always fires instead of pecking at random keys? Carpal Tunnel Syndrome for the lose.
better to have everyone sharing the same system. hey, finger wigglers should have to make mystical passes with their arms and hands too!
why not just have a response system similar to DAoC's or LoTRO's? If a mob attacks you with a certain type of attack, you have a timed response window-of-opportunity to fire off an opposing attack/ability/chain that is only available in those circumstances?
After playing both a melee and a mage type up a ways in AOC the mage will always have a decided advantage in both speed and not failing combos over a melee. Hence my decision to quit paying for this game. (That and females melee does even less damage than males, lol).
Reply
danarchy said on 6:13PM 7-10-2008
Well saying that you don't have to react to a mobs actions is true when your only fighting one mob, in AoC it's a very rare occurrence when your only fighting one thing at a time. Taking my Herald for an example:
When I start combat the first thing I do is my weakest combo, this is because I know the first attack in my set will be "wasted" on only one or two mobs as the others maneuver to get within melee range of me (remember in conan even mobs cant walk through each others avatars). Once the mobs have "settled" now I need to move so that there all in my weapon/breath arc. If i simply sidestep, or "slidestep" as some like to call it, the mobs will start pathing about and I have to try to stack them up again. Bear in mind a herald has slightly more hit points than your average rabbit so I dont have a whole lot of time to pull this off. So anyways the trick is to wait for the mobs to my side to take there swings, cast my instaroot and slide behind them. This has about 4 benefits. I get a to hit bonus for being behind them (im still not sure if this is working or not yet), I am not getting hit by as many of them, I have a chance to get one of my super long animated combos off "free", and there all nice and lined up for a fire bath. So yes active combat, in it's current infant state can be just as mindless as auto attack. But by using strategy and practice one can manage to take out allot more enemies at once with allot less risk than simply stand and swing style would allow.
With autoattack there are only a few snare/stun/blind maneuvers available, and in most cases they belong to melee classes that at best can gain a few seconds of bandage time out of it. It allows for far more strategic play! Oh, and players have moveable shields too.....
Reply
GRT said on 8:39AM 7-11-2008
@danarchy,
I agree with everything you way with regard to positioning and strategy. But I disagree this system is linked to 'active attack'. As you yourself mention, positional attacks do exist in auto-attack systems, they're just generally not as developed as they are in AoC. Which is a plus for AoC's combat system but again, has nothing to do with it being 'active attack' vs 'auto-attack'.
slaik said on 6:18PM 7-10-2008
i would rather click once than click 15 times in a row and have the same result. its not a matter of being engaged. the game as a whole is what is engaging, not whether i am clicking or not. 15 clicks every time is a lot more work than i want to be doing.
Reply
Derek K. said on 9:34PM 7-10-2008
Also, Dungeons and Dragons online has far more what I'd consider an active attack system - each click is a swing, position matters, blocking is a key press, flanking matters, etc.
AoC was going to be the DDO killer (not that DDO is too huge, but....), when people heard about active attack. But really, playing a WoW hunter, running the shot cycles, is just about the same as an active attack game.
Reply
GRT said on 9:56PM 7-10-2008
I think your argument would've been a lot more 'pure' if you'd used CoX's active combat system as an example. AoC's Shield system is interesting but isn't linked to the active combat system; you could have the same kind of system with an auto-attack combat schema by just giving special skills a direction vector.
And I realize you were trying to keep things simple, but adding even a 2nd player to the mix adds another factor: communication. Granted voice chat is become more and more prevalent. but an active combat system means stopping long enough to type "Watch behind you" means your character stops fighting and stands there like a sack of potatoes, while in an auto-attack system he's a least doing some kind of minimal damage/aggro accumulation.
I don't mean to brush aside AoC's shield system; it's actually better than you suggest because, as others have pointed out, shields DO impact the amount of damage combos do, which in fact keeps you from falling into that opening routine you mentioned.
If you start building systems where players are given less and less time to press a key to do a combo, you start getting into situations where latency and network performance become matters of life and death. Essentially you start building an action game.
But again, Combos aren't linked to active combat systems, either. Look at Heroic Opportunities in EQ2. Those are essentially combos, after all.
Reply
Bam! said on 7:22AM 7-11-2008
I'll stick with my DDO active combat system. My character (with the proper feats of course) currently runs around throwing axes and daggers, but I also have a large sheild (made of a light material so I don't loose some of my throwing ability). This means I can block doorways and get a huge damage reduction. We must note, that blocking is an active thing achieved by holding a button. When I hold the block button I can attack to shield bash or, because my tumble skill is so high, when I move and block I flip forward left and back. The bonus to the flips is that it's very quick, and I get a huge bonus to my armor when tumbling. It allows me to get out of the way of fireballs quickly.
Reply