Game Development: Bumfights

[sabinati]

i think a big problem with current combat is the 1% decay every second.

this is PER opening. so if someone tries to maintain 4 openings agianst you, you will be reducing all 4 openings at 1% each every second.

Because of the deminishing returns at higher opening %'s. the 1% decay effectively stops progress. if you use oak stance as a defence, you can stop people from getting over 70% opening on you without using skills like opportunity knocks.

I am not sure what purpose the 1% decay serves other than slowing combat down. i suggest you try removing it. it might make fighting people easier.

FYI:
Oak Stance requires forestry
Death or Glory requires seigecraft

why would they need to maintain 4 openings on you, they can kill you with one good opening, can't they?

[leanne69]

Because of the deminishing returns at higher opening %'s. the 1% decay effectively stops progress. if you use oak stance as a defence, you can stop people from getting over 70% opening on you without using skills like opportunity knocks.

Kinda agree on that. We tried for science a 1v5, ppl couldn't punch me my green def more than 50% in a 1v5 while i'm being perma punched by 5 guys under oak stance. It force ppl to use opportunity knock (or punch to death for 30 min), but you can't rely on this skill in 1v1.

The 1% decay is needed tho since unless that you won't regain defense between each fight.

That's another issue with nidbane. If you have multiple nidbane, you don't regen between each nidbane... Please fix nidbane.

[stickman]

why would they need to maintain 4 openings on you, they can kill you with one good opening, can't they?

if you only have one opening against someone they will just use dash. it seems like the viable strat is to have at least 2 openings going... one that you don't care about and one that's used for your primary damaging attack. if they use dash they remove the crappy opening you don't cave about... you can put it right back on before they can dash again

so if your using punch/chop you would also use something like flex every once in awhile so that if they use dash they get rid of the blue and not the green. that way you can opportunity knocks to get your green to max and your opponent needs to use something like artful evasion/quick dodge to reduce your green.

[dageir]

Why not make combat way simpler?
Just hit eachother with weapons/fists until one goes down? Why all this ....crap?

[donatas]

Are the readings for online players are correct? Since there was over 100 from UK, which is the biggest that I've seen thus far and then it dropped to 20. Unless they were bots. Not sure where to post this, since I couldn't find any threads talking mainly about the online players number.

[jorb]

Why not make combat way simpler?
Just hit eachother with weapons/fists until one goes down? Why all this ....crap?

Because we'd like there to be an element of personal skill in it. Moves and countermoves, different strategies, approaches, and intersections between them. I quite enjoy the new system, and do not at all consider it crap. If you do, that is your problem.

[Blacklotus]

Nerf nidbanes

[Pan_w_okularach]

This combat is better but in my opinion it still suffers from the same flaw: it's still kind of one dimentional. You can use the moves that increase enemy's openings or you can use the moves that decrease your openings and combat is just exchange of these 2 types of moves, one at a time and with fixed pauses. There has to be something else, some other mechanic(s) that you could use to tip the scales in your favour, like In legacy there were maneuvers(current manuevers are worthless) using which you could turn your opponent's moves against him and combat was less predetermined because of that, even the exeprimental server combat had these effects that worked over time and made everything more interesting. Would really like to see some changes in this direction.

[jorb]

like In legacy there were maneuvers(current manuevers are worthless)

Don't just make critical statements like that in passing, with an extreme conclusion, without explaining why they are worthless. You're not making sense if you do.

[Zeler]

like In legacy there were maneuvers(current manuevers are worthless)

Don't just make critical statements like that in passing, with an extreme conclusion, without explaining why they are worthless. You're not making sense if you do.

They simply don't have much use. Bloodlust dosent give enough weight to be worth sacrificing 50% defence, Death or Glory never gave me a single coin and Oak stance reduction on openings is miniscule. Red opening given by parry could be okay, but why do that if you can use much stronger Shield up, or Chin up/To arms with B12, depending on your MC/UA.