Thoughts on future combat systems.

[Chakravanti]

when i say luck, even though i used the expression of dice i in fact do not mean incorperating an rng.

Moreover I'm not talking about obscuring or keeping secret altogether the actual formulas that determine combat.

Rather I suggesting that we capitolize on the unknown element in the formula at every battle: "the enemy."

I think quintessentially I am suggesting that the player be able to make one to three on the spot decisions during battle that are hidden from the enemy and the result of each combat interval be determined by the various combinations that each player selects as well as his capabilities to preform those selections.

You really can make shit as complicated as you want by making combat develop through a series of sequences of stances/styles requireed to pull of a strang attack that might be countered or diverted if your opponent sees you doing them.

[brohammed]

You're right, you are really fucking high.

The technology isn't absurd. Spinning liquid metal produces an electromagnetic field just like the core of our planet. Mercury happens to be a metal that is liquid at room temperature.

Only diamagnetic metals do that, mercury is paramagnetic and doesn't do anything magnetic. Damit, I'm a chemist, I should be able to exlain it better than that, but sufficed to say mercury won't work.

[Chakravanti]

When an old scientist says that something is impossible he is most probably wrong and when a new and young scientist says something is possible he is most probably right.
-Einstein.

I'm sure it's not so simple but it's being done. It's not revolutionary technology anymore even if there are still denials persisting this shit has been around for the better part of the last century and quite possibly, the last five millenia.

[DatOneGuy]

When I started reading I enjoyed the idea, when I stopped I wasn't as much of a fan.
Normally I'm the type of guy who calls tourney-players autistic because they can't deal with the chance of an item dropping, but I don't like things to be based too much on luck, especially in this game with so much risk behind it.

Strategy should be important, as should numbers but it's primarily these 2 things that should balance themselves into creating a system imo.

I really like combat as it stands, it just needs some tweaking.

[Potjeh]

I like checkers better than poker.

[DatOneGuy]

I posted without reading chak's last post.

I guess my biggest problem in 'luck' is the guessing. I'm standing in front of a guy fighting him, and I can't tell his stance?

Too many unknowns and I'm not a fan of it. As it stands we have stuff like IP, you can't tell how much your opponent has unless you have practice in determining what he's doing, knowledge of combat, and can keep track his IP as well as all the other numbers.

[Chakravanti]

Combat should well and be it's own minigame and it just doesn't feel like it.

The idea isn't that you can't determine his 'stance' so much as can you determine what you observe means about what he's going to do next. There well and could be visual indicators/clues that are revealed when you reach a certain imbalance.

if 'stance' isn't believable then call it something else. It's not entirely hidden but it should be a game of guesstimation that partly based on your poker skills and partly based on things you can do to get clues about what to pick next in order to counter your opponant.

[DatOneGuy]

Isn't there some of that involved in the current mechanics?

I agree with 'minigame' though not using the term, the different aspects of the game should be different enough in their own rights to feel as if they are completely separate, as in nothing should feel the same about them. Nothing about farming should remind you about combat, and nothing about milking your cows should remind you of building cupboards.

Combat should be even more so, very different, and preferably very fun. But how is that achieved?


Some depth (a lot) like the current system but more fleshed out would be neat.


Either way I'd like to see some real meat, I know the current setup has it, and I've played around with it, perhaps not enough? That's very possible, I've tried to learn most moves and how to use them, but i'm still a newbie in fighting compared to veterans.

[Chakravanti]

player tempo.

There has to be an exciting rhythm to the experience. Take a look at other RPGs that made combat fun. FFIII and chrono trigger for example (since they're 2d). It's in the UI. It's in an organized fashion of rapidly controlling half a dozen different factors.

The difference here is that heals won't play a part of the experience and the choices have to be made in real time. The choices should allow the user just enough time to read the factors involved and spend about five to twenty seconds thinking about them depending on their number and the complexity of their consequences.

A good UI has five things:

1. Easy to select choices
2. A level of complexity that stimulates some mental thought involved in making the decisions
3. A tempo for making the choices at regular intervals that respects the complexity and number of choices.
4. Presents the player with the next choice as soon as the current one is made and the second previous one is finished executing.
5. Presents clear graphical indications of important if not critical information relevant to those choices.

H&H lacks #1&3.

[DatOneGuy]

I agree HnH defintely is missing #1. IMO this could be addressed withina proper hotkey setup, allowing you to have a keyboard mode that perhaps sets your whole keyboad for 'easy decisions' (one key press) for moves. No, I don't want to hotkey throw sand, yes I do want to use it int he right oppurtunity. As it stands I spend about 3 seconds thinking of the right move, and about 20 finding it, I should have 20 to think and 3 to use.

Not about the tempo, I don't have enough experience, you do, so I'll leave it at that on that one