Just tried out the new combat for a bit (I know, I'm slow), and this is my take on it, as someone who is reasonably experienced with the old combat system. I understand if this is a bit late to change stuff, and will gladly accept it, so I'll just post briefly for now. Will happily provide more detail/explanation if asked.
I like the turn-based style, the way status is updated every time either one attacks, and freedom of emotes.
Things I think could do with some tweaking:
1) The movement system in combat. Unlike old combat, where you COULD attack at a non-ideal range with a weapon and just cost more AP, in this one you can't at all. If two people with different range weapons fight, a major part of the fight is going to look like this:
X lunges north.
Y lunges north.
X lunges north.
Y lunges north.
X lunges east.
Y lunges east.
X cannot lunge east anymore. X lunges north.
Y lunges north.
X lunges west.
etc... Because no one wants to be in a position where they can only be attacked and not attack back.
Of course, there is the option of winning with superior MV, kiting your opponent til they get sapped, but that takes a loooong time. And spending the majority of combat time moving is not very interesting.
2) Staves should not be far range. No melee weapon should be, IMO, they should be medium at best. The only weapons TI has that qualifies as far range are bows and throwing knives.
3) If you idle for 5 minutes, you immediately escape combat without even needing to escape, with the associated implications. I understand we can't fully protect against twinks, but this code is just inviting that.
This is not saying that the people I have done combat with have abused the code in that manner - they haven't. Simply that it strikes me as very obvious HOW it can be twinked. Can't comment on the rest of it, since I haven't tried everything yet, but this is what I gather.
Feedback on new combat system
1) Allow attack at a non-ideal range, but at a penalized damage or some other cost. Also, possibly allow 2 cemotes per turn - either 2 movement, 1 move 1 att, or 2 att.
2) Make all melee weapons either close or medium range and bows and throwing knives far.
3) The person who idles for >5 min automatically surrenders, instead of combat being neutrally halted. Obviously this isn't an ideal solution, and any player worth their salt should allow exceptions for a RP partner who had to idle for unavoidable reasons or disconnected. But it should prevent twinkage.
2) Make all melee weapons either close or medium range and bows and throwing knives far.
3) The person who idles for >5 min automatically surrenders, instead of combat being neutrally halted. Obviously this isn't an ideal solution, and any player worth their salt should allow exceptions for a RP partner who had to idle for unavoidable reasons or disconnected. But it should prevent twinkage.
We're currently in discussion about elegant ways to allow people to attack out of range and the order has gone out to make time limit defaults auto-surrender instead of disengage.
We will not be implementing techniques for additional attacks, I think. This follows the rhetoric in another player's post on the Idea boards which I concur with. I'm not certain about the movement thing as we implemented movement as it currently is through player-tester guidence.
"Ranged" weaponry is slated to work from outside the room, so the current ranges will remain mathematically as they are. Honestly, I think this concern is more about the aesthetic of how combat appears when ranges as currently written are used. Do you think changing the names of the ranges would provide a better feel? For example: close, near, medium, long instead of close, medium, far, extended?
We will not be implementing techniques for additional attacks, I think. This follows the rhetoric in another player's post on the Idea boards which I concur with. I'm not certain about the movement thing as we implemented movement as it currently is through player-tester guidence.
"Ranged" weaponry is slated to work from outside the room, so the current ranges will remain mathematically as they are. Honestly, I think this concern is more about the aesthetic of how combat appears when ranges as currently written are used. Do you think changing the names of the ranges would provide a better feel? For example: close, near, medium, long instead of close, medium, far, extended?
Just to keep things centralized because I don't have time to look at them all at the moment:
A player recommended that people wearing armor during combat ought to find their moves are more exhausting that those without it so that the light-armored combatant is a viable alternative to the heavily clad one.
Any feedback on this for us to consider? We're currently working hard at fixing objects, help files, etc, but tweaks like this are things we're looking for to weigh up. Thanks!
A player recommended that people wearing armor during combat ought to find their moves are more exhausting that those without it so that the light-armored combatant is a viable alternative to the heavily clad one.
Any feedback on this for us to consider? We're currently working hard at fixing objects, help files, etc, but tweaks like this are things we're looking for to weigh up. Thanks!
1) I don't like that wearing platemail and wearing clothes drains the same amount of moves during combat. I realize that out of combat this isn't the case, but in combat it is. Out of combat people will most likely just hop on a horse and/or carry around several whole pigs to eat to regain their moves. I think if you're taking the realism of platemail/armor reducing moves while just walking around, you should take into account the realism of platemail/armor reducing moves during battle as well.
2) I also think not being able to attack outside of range is harsh, and I'd agree with some kind of 'move action' per turn. I disagree with multiple attacks in a single round, which I've already posted about in the other post Kinaed referenced. Maybe each move action could only move you a certain tier, like close to medium, but would not allow close to far, etc.
3) I really dislike that the miss chance is so little now. IMO the exact opposite (other than maybe in unarmed fighting) should be how it is. What I mean by this is the majority of time people should be able to dodge/sidestep/shield block/parry the attacks, but successful hits should do considerably more damage. At the moment, the current system has you whittling down your opponent through death by a thousand paper cuts (When equally matched anyway).
4) This is related to 1), but I think currently the move drains is far too high. I began combat at worked, which is roughly 75% moves and I did 6-7 attacks and was at 0. That's over 50 moves per attack, which seems a little ridiculous considering my character was wearing normal clothing. I'd like to see the move drain reduced a ton for light armor/no armor.
5) I'm not exactly sure why, but I really don't care for their being separate 'hp' for 'real' attacks and 'safe' ones. I kind of think you should gradually get injured even during safe attacks, I just think criticals should be reduced to almost nil (unless people are stupid and doing safe attacks with razor-sharp damascus weapons, or something) and the damage should be less, like 1/4th or something of what the normal is.
5b) If these separate hp gauges must be kept, it would be nice to be able to see what that 2nd gauge is other than when you're being hit, so I'd suggest a 2nd hp statistic. I think there's something similar in 'Rifts' which is a tabletop mud, and IIRC your 'sdc' would count for this, HP is damage that is vital to your character living. But eh, this is less major
6) I dislike the emphasis on armor now. Armor always had an advantage, even in old TI, but it always had disadvantages too. Armor made it harder to get up from tripping/bashed to the ground, exposing you to a lot more attacks. I'm not sure if it reduced moves, though to be quite honest. In this new combat, the -only- draw back that I'm aware of are 1)cost, 2) realism, 3) OOC(Out of combat) movement. The benefits? Higher defense rating and less damage when struck, even when movement points are at 0. This makes playing a fencing/quick character basically impossible, or at least if you play that way it makes you much disadvantaged.
To remedy this, I'd love to see less move drain on lighter armor/no armor, that would help. I'd also like that the most weighty armor, plate, have a negative modifier to attack as well to account for the added weight in the arms of the wearer. Alternatively, it would be nice if dodge/footwork were heavily penalized from using heavy armor.. because it kind of makes sense, IMO. It's harder to move fast to sidestep(footwork) when you've got 50-100 lbs of armor on, and it's harder to dodge in inflexible metal than it is in leather/clothing, IMO. I don't think shield block or parry would be affected by armor, but I'm not really sure.
7) This goes right along with the last point, I just overall dislike that Jei's established style is pretty much obsolete now. The changes I suggest above could help to equalize it, but that assumes they are implemented. Right now, the hulking, fully platmailed person is leaps and bounds ahead of an unarmored person, even if they have equal skill.. and that just bums me out.
8) At the moment, strategy seems to be gone. I realize the old combat system was complex and the new combat system is supposed to be more straightforward, but really now it's so straight forward that you can basically just attack, defend, surrender or flee. There's really not a ton else you can do. Granted, techniques will come and that will help, but.. still.
9) I have no idea if this has been taken into account, but I'd like to have it be harder to hit logically harder to hit locations on people. IIRC you can target body, head, arms, legs and hands. Hands, by far, should be the hardest to hit, probably followed by head, arms/legs and body, body being the easiest to strike for obvious reasons. The main reason I suggest this is because if someone does have armor, people would likely target the unarmored sections, and that's all well and good, but I don't think hitting a 6-10 inch hand should be just as simple as hitting a 2-3(4?) foot torso.
10) Currently fleeing works as follows: 1 person attacking you? You have a decent chance to run. 2 people? Low, but a chance to run. 3 people? You have zero chance, and obviously the same is true with more than 3 people. So, what's the problem with this? First of all, it's not always impossible to run if you're being attacked by three people, IMO. But most importantly, this is highly abuseable and is going to encourage group ganking on a regular basis. I could go out right now and buy two bodyguards and have them attack you, then have me attack you, and you would never be able to run. I think that's B.S., and I'm the guy who usually chases the flee-ers. (Note: obviously NPC combat is not in yet, but it eventually will be, so actually I couldn't do the above scene 'right now', but it's something I will be able to do). I'd like to see this tweaked a bit, less and less chance to flee with more people is fine, but I really think total elimination of being able to flee should come from obstructions (be that people/doors/magic in nature/etc.)
11) I don't particularly like how breadth of knowledge no longer plays a factor. A person with one weapon and one defense skill at 75 against a person with one weapon and three defense skills at 75, and a couple of other weapon skills at 25, are basically equally matched from a skill perspective. What this means is someone could essentially build a character with high combat stats (str/dex/con), boost two skills up to 75, and suddenly they are a killing machine. I don't think it's realistic, if someone has studied more 'disciplines' of combat, I feel like that should be taken into account as well.
12) I'd like to see 'watch' added as a viable way to protect yourself. Again, I know techniques aren't in, but it would be nice to be able to 'watch' for certain techniques. More importantly, I would like to have the watch command used for protecting certain points on your body, or 'none'. So 'watch location none' would do nothing, but 'watch location [body/arms/legs/hands/head] would give you a bonus in avoiding/reducing damage to whichever location specified, possibly at the expense of making it easier to be hit/damaged in all or some other locations. For example, if you're worried about watching your unarmed legs, you might leave your head more open to being hit. Or visa versa. That would be a nice way to add a little strategy into it, IMO.
13) I don't particularly like that your defense skill is reduced to 1 at 0 moves. I realize you're exhausted, but exhausted is not surrendered, or tied up, etc. I think instead that as moves decrease you should steadily lose defense on a percentage basis, that way someone with a 25 in attack/defense skill are not equal to someone with a 75 in attack/defense skill when both are at exhausted state. (granted, I don't think attack is affected by moves, so the 75 would probably still whoop the 25 person, but even so.)
14) The thing that I dislike the most though? If no changes are made, I pretty much either have to twink and go against character to compete with everyone else in the new system(by having Jei use armor, and probably either get over his phobia of horses or carry around several whole pigs to eat to restore moves), or I have to accept that Jei's going to get his ass kicked and/or killed by staying in character because of the new combat system.. and that's a real damn shame. The old combat system may not have been perfect, but it allowed for a variety of types of combatants and character concepts, and I don't feel the new one allows this at the moment. I realize there are still techniques to add and such, but.. right now, it just feels like that old toy game where you have the boxers that punch back and forth until one or the other's head pops off.. and I don't consider that an improvement, personally.
EDIT:
I forgot to mention the things I do like, which there really are some.
1) I do like that you can target locations now, and that the targetting actually works, this is nice.
2) I like that there are combat rounds. Now people who type fast have no advantage over anyone else(and this was something I was accused of a lot so I'm glad that this is fair and all-encompassing)
3) I'm not sure like is the right word. I have mixed feelings about the following, so let me say it this way, I do like that I can have a lot more freedom with my cemotes because I don't have to worry about keywords. That being said, I do think it would be nice if there were more modifiers, if only to open the possibility of more strategy. So, I can cemote cutting or stabbing, but strategically they are equal, which I have mixed feelings about.
4) It definitely is straightforward and has a low learning curve. I never was involved with testing and I already know enough to get the job done, so that's definitely newbie friendly (though I really do hope it will get a little more complex, truth be told).
2) I also think not being able to attack outside of range is harsh, and I'd agree with some kind of 'move action' per turn. I disagree with multiple attacks in a single round, which I've already posted about in the other post Kinaed referenced. Maybe each move action could only move you a certain tier, like close to medium, but would not allow close to far, etc.
3) I really dislike that the miss chance is so little now. IMO the exact opposite (other than maybe in unarmed fighting) should be how it is. What I mean by this is the majority of time people should be able to dodge/sidestep/shield block/parry the attacks, but successful hits should do considerably more damage. At the moment, the current system has you whittling down your opponent through death by a thousand paper cuts (When equally matched anyway).
4) This is related to 1), but I think currently the move drains is far too high. I began combat at worked, which is roughly 75% moves and I did 6-7 attacks and was at 0. That's over 50 moves per attack, which seems a little ridiculous considering my character was wearing normal clothing. I'd like to see the move drain reduced a ton for light armor/no armor.
5) I'm not exactly sure why, but I really don't care for their being separate 'hp' for 'real' attacks and 'safe' ones. I kind of think you should gradually get injured even during safe attacks, I just think criticals should be reduced to almost nil (unless people are stupid and doing safe attacks with razor-sharp damascus weapons, or something) and the damage should be less, like 1/4th or something of what the normal is.
5b) If these separate hp gauges must be kept, it would be nice to be able to see what that 2nd gauge is other than when you're being hit, so I'd suggest a 2nd hp statistic. I think there's something similar in 'Rifts' which is a tabletop mud, and IIRC your 'sdc' would count for this, HP is damage that is vital to your character living. But eh, this is less major
6) I dislike the emphasis on armor now. Armor always had an advantage, even in old TI, but it always had disadvantages too. Armor made it harder to get up from tripping/bashed to the ground, exposing you to a lot more attacks. I'm not sure if it reduced moves, though to be quite honest. In this new combat, the -only- draw back that I'm aware of are 1)cost, 2) realism, 3) OOC(Out of combat) movement. The benefits? Higher defense rating and less damage when struck, even when movement points are at 0. This makes playing a fencing/quick character basically impossible, or at least if you play that way it makes you much disadvantaged.
To remedy this, I'd love to see less move drain on lighter armor/no armor, that would help. I'd also like that the most weighty armor, plate, have a negative modifier to attack as well to account for the added weight in the arms of the wearer. Alternatively, it would be nice if dodge/footwork were heavily penalized from using heavy armor.. because it kind of makes sense, IMO. It's harder to move fast to sidestep(footwork) when you've got 50-100 lbs of armor on, and it's harder to dodge in inflexible metal than it is in leather/clothing, IMO. I don't think shield block or parry would be affected by armor, but I'm not really sure.
7) This goes right along with the last point, I just overall dislike that Jei's established style is pretty much obsolete now. The changes I suggest above could help to equalize it, but that assumes they are implemented. Right now, the hulking, fully platmailed person is leaps and bounds ahead of an unarmored person, even if they have equal skill.. and that just bums me out.
8) At the moment, strategy seems to be gone. I realize the old combat system was complex and the new combat system is supposed to be more straightforward, but really now it's so straight forward that you can basically just attack, defend, surrender or flee. There's really not a ton else you can do. Granted, techniques will come and that will help, but.. still.
9) I have no idea if this has been taken into account, but I'd like to have it be harder to hit logically harder to hit locations on people. IIRC you can target body, head, arms, legs and hands. Hands, by far, should be the hardest to hit, probably followed by head, arms/legs and body, body being the easiest to strike for obvious reasons. The main reason I suggest this is because if someone does have armor, people would likely target the unarmored sections, and that's all well and good, but I don't think hitting a 6-10 inch hand should be just as simple as hitting a 2-3(4?) foot torso.
10) Currently fleeing works as follows: 1 person attacking you? You have a decent chance to run. 2 people? Low, but a chance to run. 3 people? You have zero chance, and obviously the same is true with more than 3 people. So, what's the problem with this? First of all, it's not always impossible to run if you're being attacked by three people, IMO. But most importantly, this is highly abuseable and is going to encourage group ganking on a regular basis. I could go out right now and buy two bodyguards and have them attack you, then have me attack you, and you would never be able to run. I think that's B.S., and I'm the guy who usually chases the flee-ers. (Note: obviously NPC combat is not in yet, but it eventually will be, so actually I couldn't do the above scene 'right now', but it's something I will be able to do). I'd like to see this tweaked a bit, less and less chance to flee with more people is fine, but I really think total elimination of being able to flee should come from obstructions (be that people/doors/magic in nature/etc.)
11) I don't particularly like how breadth of knowledge no longer plays a factor. A person with one weapon and one defense skill at 75 against a person with one weapon and three defense skills at 75, and a couple of other weapon skills at 25, are basically equally matched from a skill perspective. What this means is someone could essentially build a character with high combat stats (str/dex/con), boost two skills up to 75, and suddenly they are a killing machine. I don't think it's realistic, if someone has studied more 'disciplines' of combat, I feel like that should be taken into account as well.
12) I'd like to see 'watch' added as a viable way to protect yourself. Again, I know techniques aren't in, but it would be nice to be able to 'watch' for certain techniques. More importantly, I would like to have the watch command used for protecting certain points on your body, or 'none'. So 'watch location none' would do nothing, but 'watch location [body/arms/legs/hands/head] would give you a bonus in avoiding/reducing damage to whichever location specified, possibly at the expense of making it easier to be hit/damaged in all or some other locations. For example, if you're worried about watching your unarmed legs, you might leave your head more open to being hit. Or visa versa. That would be a nice way to add a little strategy into it, IMO.
13) I don't particularly like that your defense skill is reduced to 1 at 0 moves. I realize you're exhausted, but exhausted is not surrendered, or tied up, etc. I think instead that as moves decrease you should steadily lose defense on a percentage basis, that way someone with a 25 in attack/defense skill are not equal to someone with a 75 in attack/defense skill when both are at exhausted state. (granted, I don't think attack is affected by moves, so the 75 would probably still whoop the 25 person, but even so.)
14) The thing that I dislike the most though? If no changes are made, I pretty much either have to twink and go against character to compete with everyone else in the new system(by having Jei use armor, and probably either get over his phobia of horses or carry around several whole pigs to eat to restore moves), or I have to accept that Jei's going to get his ass kicked and/or killed by staying in character because of the new combat system.. and that's a real damn shame. The old combat system may not have been perfect, but it allowed for a variety of types of combatants and character concepts, and I don't feel the new one allows this at the moment. I realize there are still techniques to add and such, but.. right now, it just feels like that old toy game where you have the boxers that punch back and forth until one or the other's head pops off.. and I don't consider that an improvement, personally.
EDIT:
I forgot to mention the things I do like, which there really are some.
1) I do like that you can target locations now, and that the targetting actually works, this is nice.
2) I like that there are combat rounds. Now people who type fast have no advantage over anyone else(and this was something I was accused of a lot so I'm glad that this is fair and all-encompassing)
3) I'm not sure like is the right word. I have mixed feelings about the following, so let me say it this way, I do like that I can have a lot more freedom with my cemotes because I don't have to worry about keywords. That being said, I do think it would be nice if there were more modifiers, if only to open the possibility of more strategy. So, I can cemote cutting or stabbing, but strategically they are equal, which I have mixed feelings about.
4) It definitely is straightforward and has a low learning curve. I never was involved with testing and I already know enough to get the job done, so that's definitely newbie friendly (though I really do hope it will get a little more complex, truth be told).
I actually agree with many of Jei's points - especially the fact that combat really seems a lot less flexible and challenging now. Instead of rotating combat keywords, knowing how/when to time resting and such, knowing when to use certain keywords against certain people.. The only thing that requires consideration now IMO, is whether to move or attack (and with range being the way it is now, that is not really a consideration, more of a forced move), and observing which part of your opponent is not armored so that you can spend all your turns attacking it and get it to 0 asap.
I really do hope that techniques improve on it.
I really do hope that techniques improve on it.
Okay, lots of people seem unsatisfied with the way close combat weapon lengths are handled. I play lots of pen and paper RPGs, and I found one that handled it pretty well.
Ranges are as follows, in order:
Shortest: Knives, Teeth, Claws, Fists, Feet
Short: Small Swords, Clubs, Hatchets
Long: Swords, Axes
Longer: Polearms
Longest: Spears, Lances, Pikes
Now, the game used an abstract distancing system, but I'm sure it could be modified to fit TI's mostly non-abstract distances.
There were four states you could be in regarding range.
Outside Striking Distance: You can't attack. If all fighters are in this state, the fight is over.
Lunging Distance: You have to extend yourself to attack at this range. It's slightly harder to attack in this posture, and defense takes no penalty.
Optimal Striking Distance: No penalties.
Inside Arms Reach Striking Distance: At this range, you're very close. While the other ranges don't force both fighters into that range, if one person is inside, both are inside. Fists and knives take no penalty here, a shield bash or hilt strike takes a small one, small swords a slightly bigger penalty, all the way up to polearms and the like which are nearly useless and impossible to use.
In most cases, the longer the weapon, the easier a time you have getting into your optimal position and your enemy's worst positions. This situation reverses if you're on the inside.
I would suggest that positioning be rolled /between/ combat rounds, so that you don't have to actually spend an action positioning yourself. Combat is fluid. Nobody stands still and trades blows like some sort of robot. Skills could be used for this, with weapon length, dexterity, and even height providing bonuses (longer steps mean you could step quicker, but that isn't necessary to include.)
The winner of a positioning test can choose what range they would like to be in, as per the above options. What happens to the enemy's range depends on the compared weapon lengths. If they are the same, then so is the range. If you have the longer weapon and you're in optimal distance, then a weapon one step shorter would be lunging. Two steps or more shorter would be unable to attack. If you have a shorter weapon and you are in optimal range, so are all the longer weapons.
An exceptional success, however denoted on TI, would let you move two range increments in the fight. You could move from lunging to inside, for example.
This, as may be noticed, gives a strong advantage to longer weapons in most cases. If you want to use smaller weapons, your best bet is to be lightly armored and very fast so that you can reach the inside range. On the inside range, the shortest weapons rule the fight.
I understand this isn't an ideal solution, of course. I also understand it makes things a little more complicated and might be hard to code. I do think, though, that it would satisfy what people aren't liking about such rigid ranges, as well as making the fast, lightly armored fighter still valid.
Ranges are as follows, in order:
Shortest: Knives, Teeth, Claws, Fists, Feet
Short: Small Swords, Clubs, Hatchets
Long: Swords, Axes
Longer: Polearms
Longest: Spears, Lances, Pikes
Now, the game used an abstract distancing system, but I'm sure it could be modified to fit TI's mostly non-abstract distances.
There were four states you could be in regarding range.
Outside Striking Distance: You can't attack. If all fighters are in this state, the fight is over.
Lunging Distance: You have to extend yourself to attack at this range. It's slightly harder to attack in this posture, and defense takes no penalty.
Optimal Striking Distance: No penalties.
Inside Arms Reach Striking Distance: At this range, you're very close. While the other ranges don't force both fighters into that range, if one person is inside, both are inside. Fists and knives take no penalty here, a shield bash or hilt strike takes a small one, small swords a slightly bigger penalty, all the way up to polearms and the like which are nearly useless and impossible to use.
In most cases, the longer the weapon, the easier a time you have getting into your optimal position and your enemy's worst positions. This situation reverses if you're on the inside.
I would suggest that positioning be rolled /between/ combat rounds, so that you don't have to actually spend an action positioning yourself. Combat is fluid. Nobody stands still and trades blows like some sort of robot. Skills could be used for this, with weapon length, dexterity, and even height providing bonuses (longer steps mean you could step quicker, but that isn't necessary to include.)
The winner of a positioning test can choose what range they would like to be in, as per the above options. What happens to the enemy's range depends on the compared weapon lengths. If they are the same, then so is the range. If you have the longer weapon and you're in optimal distance, then a weapon one step shorter would be lunging. Two steps or more shorter would be unable to attack. If you have a shorter weapon and you are in optimal range, so are all the longer weapons.
An exceptional success, however denoted on TI, would let you move two range increments in the fight. You could move from lunging to inside, for example.
This, as may be noticed, gives a strong advantage to longer weapons in most cases. If you want to use smaller weapons, your best bet is to be lightly armored and very fast so that you can reach the inside range. On the inside range, the shortest weapons rule the fight.
I understand this isn't an ideal solution, of course. I also understand it makes things a little more complicated and might be hard to code. I do think, though, that it would satisfy what people aren't liking about such rigid ranges, as well as making the fast, lightly armored fighter still valid.
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests