jorb wrote:DDDsDD999 wrote: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.
Because every fight ever in this game has been one side running away from the side chasing it. The chasers will only be able to use these targeted moves, while the runners will just have to aim a backwards attack to stop them, and hope they have the ping to stop it.
jorb wrote: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?
The present system only really sucks in 1v1s, group fights are completely different. This system will just be a check on who has enough numbers to dog-pile someone,
jorb wrote: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.
Any 1v1 with this system between smart people has just been the person with high openings walking away to lower them. Trying to use a pursuit move in a 1v1 to counter defending just results in it getting cancelled every time (maybe it'll hit if they have to live in america or australia). Can't say anything about PvE, you haven't shown us anything.
jorb wrote: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.
You could fix a ton of issues with the test server by giving it a somewhat realisitic map i.e. not just sprint terrain and snow. Some trees to test how these pursuit moves actually work would help.
No body is going to pvp this world, the only people who still play are in it for the larpy shit. Only feedback you're going to get if you add it is what animals are too strong and people trying to spar their few friends who still play.
jorb wrote:Does this system do anything actively worse than the presently running system? The result there right now would be pretty much the same, no?
This system has the massive problem of being at an insurmountable disadvantage trying to chase someone who decides they don't feel like fighting you. In the current system, disengaging from someone either requires you to pull some maneuver with clipping or the chaser to feel pressured enough to disengage. With this system, disengaging from someone is simply deciding to not participate, there's no point of tension where the enemy is on you, both of your openings are high, and a lot of damage can be done. If your openings get high, you walk in the opposite direction. Anytime the chaser tries to throw their body at you, you just hit back. The only time this is a problem is when you're so outnumbered the enemy can simply dog-pile you, which isn't a good balance for this system. Fighting with imbalanced numbers will consequently be awful.
Not being able to even hit your enemy because you have worse ping is a very bad change.