W7 combat

[MagicManICT]

However, I'm not against the hhp loss, if anything I think it should be greater, it's particularly handy in early game as prevention but then like Jordan says it means nothing later on to established raiding players. Maybe the hhp loss could rise alongside your stats, i.e. higher stats more hhp damage. I realise this won't be popular, lol, but it seems fairer.
Or, adjust hhp loss to the crime committed, the more serious the crime the more hhp damage is dealt, and still make it rise with higher stats.

% of HHP / sqrt (stealth/10). % of HHP based on type of crime*. Trespassing is least (if any... not sure about that even causing loss). Murder is greatest, but shouldn't be more than about 10% of remaining HHP** (one should never have to question if taking out that scum's alt is worth suiciding yourself; also, one could argue that it doesn't need any penalty if there is a better way of summon-killing a killer). Not sure that starting a fight should cause any loss because, well, you're starting a fight. Pick the wrong one and you'll end up dead with or without a starting penalty. Theft shouldn't be much either, as you can replace lost items. It's a bit harder to replace lost bases. As you can see, if you want to push stealth, you can potentially eliminate any real losses. (Gives that near useless stat something and makes it just a bit harder to grind up crime alts).

*The base value for these could be quite high or the formula tweaked (or changed), but the idea is that. I realize that with just 90 stealth, easily achieved in a mid-world village, you lose a third of the penalty, and if the base is only 1%, .3% at 100 HHP isn't even 1 damage. One could say that it is always rounded up so that a person always takes at least 1 damage, but I'd like to think that a truly masterful criminal should be able to do almost anything and not take a single point of damage.

**mostly just a cap. This could follow the same curve otherwise
----

As far as combat goes, I don't think there is anything wrong with movement combat, but that wasn't how the system was designed to begin with. It was just a consequence of evolving strategies. I think jorb is trying to get people to work with the system instead of avoiding it, and because it is so easy to run away and not engage, any changes that make it easier to do this, even if they may nerf movement combat, just makes the system worse. The only suggestion I can make is to bring in short stuns and roots so that players are forced to stop, even if only a fraction of a second.

[Lordtimo]

As far as combat goes, I don't think there is anything wrong with movement combat, but that wasn't how the system was designed to begin with. It was just a consequence of evolving strategies. I think jorb is trying to get people to work with the system instead of avoiding it, and because it is so easy to run away and not engage, any changes that make it easier to do this, even if they may nerf movement combat, just makes the system worse. The only suggestion I can make is to bring in short stuns and roots so that players are forced to stop, even if only a fraction of a second.

Thought about the same, or some small slows if you hit players moving / turned their back to you.

[jordancoles]

As far as combat goes, I don't think there is anything wrong with movement combat, but that wasn't how the system was designed to begin with. It was just a consequence of evolving strategies. I think jorb is trying to get people to work with the system instead of avoiding it, and because it is so easy to run away and not engage, any changes that make it easier to do this, even if they may nerf movement combat, just makes the system worse. The only suggestion I can make is to bring in short stuns and roots so that players are forced to stop, even if only a fraction of a second.

Thought about the same, or some small slows if you hit players moving / turned their back to you.

Slows and roots are worse because of the gank mentality

Movement hits should 0 your defense and do a very small percentage of damage when successful so that even long chases give you the ability to wear your opponent down over time instead of what we currently have which is one punch to 50% followed by chasing with no attack bar for 20 minutes because they're not using thunder back at you to fuel maneuvers.

Even if you hit them moving at 100% atk, chances are you'll only hit them to 30%ish moving provided that you don't outstat them terribly.

[jorb]

I thought you said people should be able to opt out of combat, coles? ^^

[NOOBY93]

I thought you said people should be able to opt out of combat, coles? ^^

He did? I found him saying over and over how running out of combat is terrible.

[jordancoles]

I thought you said people should be able to opt out of combat, coles? ^^

People could opt out with the old kambert, but they had a chance of dying. What I mean when I say that people should have a choice to pvp or not, I'm talking about people like Emerald. Currently, if you want to be peaceful and stay indoors to trade/farm/socialize you are free to do so. If you go outside, you are in a way accepting pvp and that is the choice you have made. Brickwalls made this possible and the reason why I bring it up in Salem is because there is no sense of safeness for people who like farming/being social/being nice. Your walls are broken and you are forced to fight no matter what. Another thing is that with waste claims in salem, you have a 4 hour window where you must break the claim. Any raiders worth a damn have no problem camping that totem for those 4 hours and they take a decent amount of time to break uncontested. This means that people are made to go outside and fight, or move on to another base. Rams in haven are slightly different because they can be easily destroyed and they can be broken for the full 24 hours. Because of this, people can ramcheck, break the ram at any time, and continue to live peacefully.

I personally like the haven system because it keeps bases in tact meaning that open pvp outdoors can continue to happen. By killing off the main base and wiping it dry along with any characters, you are setting back actual pvp by months-- if not forever.

[Jojjkano]

A movement hit should be a fatal mistake from the player, this fixes all the dull stuff with the combat as it is atm.
Either back to old w6 mechanics or something the others suggested like def bar to 0 no matter what attack the guy hitting you is at, if you dont have 100 def u should take a big chunk of hp loss aswell.

Also sword nerf wasnt necessary, even with fullmartial you barely do damage through armor atm.

[jordancoles]

Also sword nerf wasnt necessary, even with fullmartial you barely do damage through armor atm.

Sliders in general are flawed and I doubt they'll be sticking around in haven 2.0

[Jojjkano]

And even if you do decide to fight against all odds all you need to do is call the thunder and valorous strike, and if the enemy has more numbers than you they can just all valor your ass and your dead.

In w6 u could atleast defend yourself against movement hits and you would be fine.

[NOOBY93]

In w6 u could atleast defend yourself against movement hits and you would be fine.

Why do you think this is different in W7? They didn't buff static, just nerfed movement. You can still defend yourself against movement hits and be fine. The only problem now is, you are fine when you don't defend yourself against movement hits.