So i looked at your new combat system..

[overtyped]

- There is a fatal flaw in your idea of action combat, and that is that people play this game from all over the world. There isnt NA/EU etc type servers where people with the same ping can play with each other, HAVEN HAS JUST ONE WORLD, which means many people will have bad ping and that has always been the downfall of action combat. HAVEN IS NOT THE GAME FOR IT.

So now it got me wondering. Why do people who create open world freebuilding mmos think that classless is the way to go? There is not a single one out there with classes. Part of the reason those type of mmo's all fail in my opinion is the utter lack of individuality. Everyone being able to do everything in pvp is a fun idea on paper but in practice... not so much. Would world of warcraft be fun if everyone could only play a warrior and nothing else? That is what you guys are all pushing.

Even if you change the system 100000 times like you keep doing, it will always be the same. You are still a warrior fighting other warriors and its boring. It doesn't matter if you add a million different ways to fight, people will still go with what is strongest, however with classes you can't be the best at everything. Every class brings something to the table even if one class is stronger than another.

Even if your system is low magic, there is many many things that can be done in regard to permanent classes.
example:


1: Shieldmaster: Mechanic: passive ability to increase hitbox by 4 tiles to become the one hit by pulls, or halt charges.( Increased hitbox doesn't affect enemy character movement) ( hitbox doesn't restrict people in your party) ( heavy armor takes little damage, deals pitifully small damage)
2: Sickle and chain: Mechanic: can pull an enemy to you or pull an ally to you, if they need to disengage from taking too much damage. ( 5 square range attacks, squishy with medium damage )
3: Martial artist: Mechanic: Can knock back an enemy/enemies attacking you ( close range attacking, medium armor decent damage)
4: Warrior: Mechanic charges an enemy and slows them ( medium armor close range) (normal speed when pursuing enemies)
5: Ranger: 10 square ranged attacks, Mechanic: can leap away from whatever enemy you are targeting, (slower when pursuing enemies)


This is just random shit i've made up off the top of my head that doesn't require action combat but makes every class have their role, doesnt matter who does the most damage, and doesn't require magic or healing to be in the game.


You arent going to get any kills without warriors to slow, you arent going to get anywhere without martial artists to help you disengage, you arent going to get anywhere without a sickle and chain pulling an enemy out of position or saving an ally, you arent going to get anywhere if you can't counter sickle and chain/chargers without shieldmasters. You arent going to get anywhere without rangers acting as scouts

You wanted actual fun movement action combat here you go

This is more of a rant than a critique because you have your own vision and sadly it's GENERIC GOUDA AND WILL ALWAYS BE GENERIC GOUDA.

[Headchef]

Understand what you mean but if there were certain classes for example, and you would find another fighter then either you notice his class and either think you'll have a good chance against his class or be average or have a downside.

Then the composition of a squad will also matter so if you have 5 friends meaning 1 class double in your squad and he is not online you would basically lose against opponent having all four. (If this is meta)

Atleast in current state everything is equal up until the point you involve ping. So does it make sense to make things unequal for the sake of equalising the ping issue? Perhaps, or not...

Atleast at the end of the day it reinstates that which we already know; life is unfair across all aspects one way or another haha.

[abt79]

people will still just use the best class, which will be Ranged unless other classes can literally block arrows or archery is massively underpowered
In other games you might be able to get away with classes but it's been proven time and time again haven autists will always find then bot the best available option no matter how different the options are
the only way to encourage class diversity is to require multiple classes to make the best gank squad, and while i guess your hookshot man sort of gets at that, what we really need is for banners/a warrior's yell move/whatever else to buff nearby players. These absolutely should not be credo-based but i wouldn't be entirely against something like a class skill tree locking these niche/unique moves

[MagicManICT]

Even if you change the system 100000 times like you keep doing, it will always be the same. You are still a warrior fighting other warriors and its boring.

This. The great thing about the legacy system was that you had some utility and counterplay. The current system would be just fine if the player options were expanded. There needs some depth where one person can't do everything. Even with the addition of 4 different attack/defense types, it's still the same system as legacy, but torn down into... something blah.

[wonder-ass]

Understand what you mean but if there were certain classes for example, and you would find another fighter then either you notice his class and either think you'll have a good chance against his class or be average or have a downside.

Then the composition of a squad will also matter so if you have 5 friends meaning 1 class double in your squad and he is not online you would basically lose against opponent having all four. (If this is meta)

Atleast in current state everything is equal up until the point you involve ping. So does it make sense to make things unequal for the sake of equalising the ping issue? Perhaps, or not...

Atleast at the end of the day it reinstates that which we already know; life is unfair across all aspects one way or another haha.

fully agree. i think you could accomplish this same thing with out classes just moves that take up extra slots in the deck (maneuvers could fill in this role??) this way people can switch out of roles on a whim and not be stuck with a set role. also allows for a lot more freedom imo.

[shubla]

I am sure that devs have done some combat testing while simulating their connection to server to be the same as people from australia or NA (large pings etc.) right?.

But I have always said about the siege and combat, that it is waste of time.
It will always be too easy, or too hard.
Having melee and ranged combat balanced is difficult, having even melee weapons balanced is difficult.

Of course one could look at games like eve online, wow, where there are multiple classes/weapons/ways to play, and people seem to use most of them. But something like wow is very different when compared to HnH, same with EVE, way more complex systems.

Maybe devs should add something to weapons and armors, so that some types of armors would be strong against some types of weapons by a meaningful amount etc. This would force people to use different types of weapons, because if all of your group use only axes, enemies could use armor that counters axes and you would be at disadvantage. (Of course, swapping weapons/armor in middle of fight should be made not possible etc.) At least this is how things kind of work in EVE online.

Maybe ranged combat should also have more supportive role in pvp, like it would be beneficial to have an archer or a few in your group, but with diminishing returns, so there wouldn't be scenario where everyone would be archers, because they'd be op. This would be kind of like in wow, (must have tanks, dps/multiple other roles in raids to succeed, probably)
Could also add some kind of shaman that would have more of a supportive role in pvp.

But then again, this is not wow or eve online, so same things won't work. Maybe with current mechanics it's impossible to make a nice combat system-

[Zentetsuken]

I think classes could easily be implemented with this iteration of combat and credos.

If there was a separate entire branch of credos-like skills that could be obtained on a "choose A or B but not both" sort of basis it could mimic the free and un-classed feeling but offer a wide variety of unique fighting styles. Different moves with different ranges, speeds, defenses and bonuses. Maybe even different gear and weapon bonuses.

Most other mmos have a wide range of classes and then with updates they tweak individual moves and gears to slowly shift the meta as they see metas take over. I think this would be a way more fun and fluid way to deal with the combat system on a long-term basis. The current system would only ever be tweaked in such a way that the best combo changes as it becomes complained about too much, and then everybody switches to the next best combo. It would be much cooler if there was many excellent combos and meta moves respective to some chain of unique skills you fashioned your toon with.

[terechgracz]

Classes are way to go.

[Archiplex]

Mmyeah, classes would be cool as a thing, but unless the credo system is heavily improved, I'd be against attaching it to credos.


I would, overall, like to see more combat specialization and strategizing beyond just move selection and UA/MC. I would like to see more specialized equipment in combat that changes the effects of combat moves (Scrap the current armor system for a P/B/S (pierce/bludgeon/slashing) system that protects against different damage types better, have combat moves and maneuvers that require you to use specific armor), more differences between various melee weapons (there's some of this with moves like Sting and 2h weapons having cooldowns, but i'd like to see more)

Classes would be cool too. I could see classes being something you 'pick' that allow you to learn class-specific moves that other classes cannot learn, and if people really want to go deeper, trees of classes.

Above all else, though- they should be specialties. Sure, it'd increase alt use, but I think thats actually kind of OK for combat? Having multiple characters each having different combat moves and styles for different situations (raid defense vs raider, to name one up front). Maybe having classes encourage the use of specific equipment (such as a ranger class dealing more damage with bows like the strider credo, or a sentinel class that gains more defense from armor, berserker that deals more damage with dual-wield attacks while dual wielding, etc)- which also helps seperate a bit of the 'grind' away from just quality numbers.

[tyrtix]

tbh, i liked the "old" deck building system, wich factually could build "classes" in game without have to exactly choose anything from scratch, except how the construction of the deck and the use of weapons and armor were chosen, and the relatively small randomness of the card deck could make the combat a lot more interactive for players, while giving enough options that every player can make a different interesting combination of cards, if those are chosen in the right way.