Game Development: Patriotic Takedown

[jordancoles]

Someone change my mind

[wonder-ass]

fully agree stick to none lock on moves trying to balance a move that basically aims for you in a combat system that is heavily based around aiming is stupid.
also i still stand by my statement that easy running away will ALWAYS be better than not being able to run away.

[DDDsDD999]

You can't just band-aid this system by adding these targeted chase moves. Everyone's gonna have to use them to run away using animals/alts. And they ruin the one thing this system had going for it: not using the targeting system. They only make the rest of the moves even less usable.

How much have you played it? Is your experience that these moves invalidate the other moves? Because that is certainly not my experience. Rather to the contrary, my experience has been that if you try to kite your opponent with the quick pursuit moves you create openings for him to use the non-targeted moves. At the same time, the targeted pursuit moves prevent your opponent from playing entirely passively/reactively.

Haven't played since this update because no one wants to play it. Valhalla is also impossible to test anything with because everything is completely unrealistic. But it was already the case that the non-targeted moves were only usable if your target was trying to run at you, don't see how go for the jugular on steroids changes it. This whole system of chaser has to use the targeted moves while the runner either counter-attacks the one person or gets dog-piled seems dumb, whether it works or not. And we can't really test if it does because of how bad valhalla is.

I don't really see any positives to trying to force this system to work this way. By forcing one side to deal with targeting, this combat system doesn't really make anything better than the current combat system.

The running away thing may or may not be a problem, considering animals, horses, &c, but a chain of chasers, at least hearthlings on foot, will ultimately have to be constrained by a final alt who is not running at pursuit speed. No?

Alt on horse -> go fast -> go home.

Also, it's probably still impossible to deal with a 1v2 scenario. Anytime the 1 tries to fight back, the 2 just have the person getting attacked run away and defend while the other chips the 1 down. There's no chance for the 1 to do anything but run anyway, just like how running away is always the best option in every part of this system.

[maze]

I would have more opions of the new combat if I was able to test it.
Again please add a dummy or animals to the combat test client or someway to spawn them.

pvp I'm normally not grouping up to play test with people.
with pve I can atlest test how it feels vs animals.

[kangabro]

The videos i watched with the lag showed people living outside of america or russia made what you guys are talking about unplayable.
Gota get a super low ping to win in pvp.

[jorb]

Haven't played since this update because no one wants to play it. Valhalla is also impossible to test anything with because everything is completely unrealistic. But it was already the case that the non-targeted moves were only usable if your target was trying to run at you, don't see how go for the jugular on steroids changes it. This whole system of chaser has to use the targeted moves while the runner either counter-attacks the one person or gets dog-piled seems dumb, whether it works or not. And we can't really test if it does because of how bad valhalla is.

I don't really see any positives to trying to force this system to work this way. By forcing one side to deal with targeting, this combat system doesn't really make anything better than the current combat system.

Why is it one sided? The move is available to both sides if they want to use it. You also said this.

The system still just doesn't work, there's nothing to stop someone from just walking in the opposite direction from you because they feel like it.

I take it you're pretty down on the whole thing, and prefer the existing system entirely? Do we agree that the present system is bad? Doesn't it suck that it is just a stat check?

[jorb]

One of my motivations here is that 1v1, especially as it pertains to PvE, is a completely braindead stat check. I would like that to not be the case, and I'm fairly certain that this system handles that better. Given how "no one" (your words) wants to test it under anything but real circumstances anyway, that may just be what we'll have to do. People have always been down on every new iteration of combat, so I'm not sure what weight to ascribe your theorizing.

Does this system do anything actively worse than the presently running system? The result there right now would be pretty much the same, no?

[shubla]

One of my motivations here is that 1v1, especially as it pertains to PvE, is a completely braindead stat check. I would like that to not be the case, and I'm fairly certain that this system handles that better. Given how "no one" (your words) wants to test it under anything but real circumstances anyway, that may just be what we'll have to do. People have always been down on every new iteration of combat, so I'm not sure what weight to ascribe your theorizing.

Does this system do anything actively worse than the presently running system? The result there right now would be pretty much the same, no?

Add some RNG to the effect of combat moves so then even people with low stats may have a chance.

[Rexz]

One of my motivations here is that 1v1, especially as it pertains to PvE, is a completely braindead stat check. I would like that to not be the case, and I'm fairly certain that this system handles that better. Given how "no one" (your words) wants to test it under anything but real circumstances anyway, that may just be what we'll have to do. People have always been down on every new iteration of combat, so I'm not sure what weight to ascribe your theorizing.

Does this system do anything actively worse than the presently running system? The result there right now would be pretty much the same, no?

Add some RNG to the effect of combat moves so then even people with low stats may have a chance.

That might be a decent idea, say for conenal/aoe attack, the further the target away from the middle, the larger the range of potential damage, the closer the more accurate the damage would be but its still in a range of potential damage.

For lock on attack, the further you travel until you reach the target, the weaker the damage will be in a wider range of RNG damage, if you cancel your attack and try again when closer, the calculation will remembers that and you would still deal less damage if you trigger it again.

Make it so that defensive maneuvers is stronger against lock-on chasing/lunging attack, so all targets who are attacking you will, in effect, be doing glacing damage. So if you time your defenses properly, you can avoid taking a shit ton of damage from multiple targets lunging at you.

[jorb]

Randomness is something we try to intentionally avoid. Having the outcome of a fight be determined by a one off critical hit is terrible.