Quote Originally Posted by Radnar View Post
What this means, in the most basic sense, is that - all other things being equal (skill, gear, class balance) - the defender will lose, always. Forced reaction-lag-time mechanics, like movement inertia, remove the defender from the equation and create binary PvP encounters where everything relies on the successful execution of one player (the attacker), rather than of both players. To elaborate with a brutally simple model:

Consider a world where all players had two HP and one attack, which always dealt one HP damage. In this world we have two players who do not see eachother and are moving at random vectors. Then assume they both see eachother at the same time. Who wins?

The player who had the more advantageous initial movement vector (most likely towards the other player) will always beat the one who had the less advantageous (most likely away from the other player; requiring them to reorient themselves before they can attack) if there is movement inertia involved. They will always get their attack off first, bringing their opponent to 1 HP before they can respond with their own attack.

In a perfect world, the win-rate should be split evenly between the two players 50-50 in a way that ignores their initial movement vector given enough trials. In perfect "Skill Based" PvP, the outcome of a fight should ignore random factors determined before either player was aware of the other, and instead focus on each player's ability to successfully respond to eachother's actions. If random factors are not ignored, then the PvP becomes luck-based, rather than skill-based.
Basically, you are saying that the defender will be at a disadvantage because he gets the handicap of having to turn first. But then, you can also turn it around by moving backwards on your movement vector, making the attacking player miss, thus forcing them to turn instead - nothing stops you from stabbing him while he does that.

This all is assuming the inertia is implemented 100% realistically. Which will not be the case since they're dropping motion captured animations. All they have to do is to start playing the inertia animation the moment you let go off your movement key. Thanks to motion blending, it should still look believable without introducing an actual latency.

Responsive controls and realistic motion are not mutually exclusive. After all the goal of games is to be realistic as possible with things adapted from the real world, while expanding the possibilities with something that isn't. If you only concentrate on good graphics but leave the animation unrealistic, it will just weird the people out.

PvP is not the major focus of the game, this is why I want to have completely separate rulesets. I don't want the realistic movement animations to suffer because it "makes PvP less responsive". This is the old "let's nerf PvE for PvP!" story, and I do not want that, nor the opposite to happen. And I'm sure I'm not alone on this.