PlaneShift
Gameplay => Wish list => PvP,PK and Thieving => Topic started by: Quitarias on March 04, 2007, 05:38:08 am
-
I have played all three parts of gothic and i realy must say that their combat system is one of the best i have seen because it allows very difrent tactics to be used(though its realy hard till you get used to it). Personaly i think something like this would destroy the need for Hit'N'Run duels because plaeyrs would have their own backstep block and attack combinations that are easier and better executed while stationary(for those who havent played Gothic the system required you to draw your sword press and hold shift and then press wasd depending on the combination you want "w" was for a purely offensive combo "s" was for a block "d" and "a" helped when you needed to fend something off while your friend chops it to bits).
I was wondering if there was a way to introduce something like this into PS because in my oppinion it would realy raise the challenge and thrill of duels to a whole new level.
-
I don't think player skills in combat is what we are after.
-
Yes raise the challenge and thrill! Then noone will do anything else. Kind of like it already is..
-
Well i offered my idea its all in Talads vote now
But personaly even if it was like this one duels would be more realistic after all there is movement but not as much as hit and run gives in duels.
Also these kinds of duels would create a way for a person not having to rely on the system to strike but on himself. Still as ive said i can argue here all i want but if Talad doesent want it its not geting in.
-
Thats exactly what they're trying to avoid.
-
Players having a choice in their battle strategy directly ???
-
Players having to use their own skill. Someone with slow reflexs wouldn't be able to role play a fast fighter regardless of their stats. Imagine the musical instrument requiring the player to be able to play guitar otherwise no matter how much you leveled you were useless at it.
-
What they probably want is two players face eachother and agree on fighting .. then the game mechanics kick in and you just have to sit back and watch the show. That way the fight outcome isn't dependent on the player but on the character.
-
Yeh that kinda sucks.
In Guild Wars you have at least some control over your character and the outcome but here the only effect you may have is changing stance and weapons.
-
What they probably want is two players face eachother and agree on fighting .. then the game mechanics kick in and you just have to sit back and watch the show. That way the fight outcome isn't dependent on the player but on the character.
I would prefer to watch an action movie then like "Gladiator"...
No way of becoming that! It would suck! Even in PnP RPGs you can decide which type of spell to cast or when to make your character retreat. The control of the tactical part of combat should be given to players.
-
Why no player skill in fighting? Seems rather silly to me. Everything else ingame requires player skill. You have to know the right spot to mine at. You have to know the right amount of stock to craft with. Why shouldn't you have to know the right way to fight?
-
Probably for the same reason we have elves but no dragons, undead grendols but no vampires. Personal preference on part of the dev team in deciding how parts of the game should function.
-
And here I thought that was because you guys wanted to be original... my mistake :-\
-
Probably for the same reason we have elves but no dragons, undead grendols but no vampires. Personal preference on part of the dev team in deciding how parts of the game should function.
So basicaly... too much of a pain in the ass to code then? It makes sense to have player skill involved because otherwise your not 'playing' and surely the idea of a game is to play it? Like people have said, if we cant control, we might as well go watch a movie.
Players having to use their own skill. Someone with slow reflexs wouldn't be able to role play a fast fighter regardless of their stats. Imagine the musical instrument requiring the player to be able to play guitar otherwise no matter how much you leveled you were useless at it.
And if a 3 year old maxed their characters intellegence or charisma (both of which stupid things to have as stats if you ask me)?
-
So basicaly... too much of a pain in the ass to code then? It makes sense to have player skill involved because otherwise your not 'playing' and surely the idea of a game is to play it? Like people have said, if we cant control, we might as well go watch a movie.
You do control. You control how your character interacts with other people. You decide the decisions that your character makes. Can you control the movie?
And if a 3 year old maxed their characters intellegence or charisma (both of which stupid things to have as stats if you ask me)?
What if s/he does?
-
So basicaly... too much of a pain in the ass to code then?
I don't know where you got that from when I said it's based on preference. Of course you're playing the game - you're the one making decisions for your character. However since you're not physically inhabiting your character's body, there are some decisions the game needs to make for you, with your guidance. In PlaneShift, you don't get the chance to lag out your opponent and do fancy button-smashing in order to prove your skill as a player. You work with your character and have him or her prove his/her own worth. You don't get the credit for an awesome fight - it doesn't belong to you. That's your character's work. If anyone wants it the other way around, they may need to look for another game.
-
You don't get the credit for an awesome fight - it doesn't belong to you. That's your character's work. If anyone wants it the other way around, they may need to look for another game.
Pfft I'd like to get SOME cerdit for well done RPs I do, otherwise fair game.
And if a 3 year old maxed their characters intellegence or charisma (both of which stupid things to have as stats if you ask me)?
What if s/he does?
Then the 3 year old is inhibited in his/her abilty to have an intellegent character in anyway other than the number... Intellegence is player skill that is required. But I supose thats the way the cookie crumbles.
-
Pfft I'd like to get SOME cerdit for well done RPs I do, otherwise fair game.
I'm not even going to comment on that...
Then the 3 year old is inhibited in his/her abilty to have an intellegent character in anyway other than the number... Intellegence is player skill that is required. But I supose thats the way the cookie crumbles.
If I make a character that is a mathamatical genius I'd need to back that up wouldn't I. Granted the game mechanics don't cover everything. It's not going to hold your hand and guide you though it. If I download and install the game with no hands somehow I can't fight eiter. No way to touch the mouse.
-
Charming. Your nose + the keyboard doesnt take a genius.
-
Was that ment to have a point? It was an example. If you're stupid, you don't have the OOC knowledge to do it. It becomes bad rp then.
-
I don't get it, are you both arguing the same side here, or what?
-
He's saying that since dumb people can play we should have player skill based PVP. I'm saying that regardless of who plays, we shouldn't.
-
That's your character's work. If anyone wants it the other way around, they may need to look for another game.
To be honest, when player skill is taken completely out of dueling, I will find another game... I love rp, but that's thanks to the community, it has nothing to do with the game. I can go rp in another game that has decent PvP.
Watching your char doing everything isn't entertaining, as it's been said before, I could go watch a movie and it would look far cooler. I don't see why the devs are so averse to player skill being involved in combat when they have nothing against it being there in every other part of the game. This game probably has the most player skill involved crafting I've seen, same goes for mining. Why is there player skill invovled in these parts? Well, because without it, it wouldn't be fun. Same goes for combat, when you're not doing anything, it's not fun, and to be honest the answer of 'because we feel like it' seems like a cop out to me.
-
Yeah what he said. The only thing keeping me is the community, not the game.
-
Hmm, everyone has a different preference as far as playing style.
Normally I would agree with the idea of player-skill in an RPG (or at least a certain degree of it) rather than the fight being determined simply by how much you've power-leveled.
However, in this context I don't, for one simple reason: lag. Even the best of us lag around a bit. For the worst of us, combat will be impossible due to lag, which means (at least for now) they'll have no way of getting decent experience.
In an internet game, determining the winner based on 'player skill' is pretty much just determining the winner based on connection speed...
-
Shouldn't the outcome of a game of Groffeltoe be automated based on INT then?
I wouldn't mind an alternate combat system.. but I'd like to see one that gives the player a lot of strategic decision making, so that there is still something more to learn to become a good fighter than just how to level your character up. Not something timing based, but something that can make some use of knowledge, cunning, tactics... otherwise it becomes a dull, passive experience.
-
Having a "combat system" just like in "the Sims", where you just click on a unfriendly "sim", order the "sim" to "fight" and wait without having any choice on influencing on the outcome of the fight tactically on the skills/spells the characters will use or movements he/she will make, would be the most boring combat system ever designed for a MMORPG. And if it is the choice of development, I guess that roleplaying combat, although more difficult, will always be more interesting.
-
However, in this context I don't, for one simple reason: lag. Even the best of us lag around a bit. For the worst of us, combat will be impossible due to lag, which means (at least for now) they'll have no way of getting decent experience.
If you have a DSL connection, which most everyone does by now, you shouldn't have any problem.
-
However, in this context I don't, for one simple reason: lag. Even the best of us lag around a bit. For the worst of us, combat will be impossible due to lag, which means (at least for now) they'll have no way of getting decent experience.
If you have a DSL connection, which most everyone does by now, you shouldn't have any problem.
I dont. As I said in a previous post. Should I have to play a slow, weak and poorly trained character just because I have the misfortune to not live in a broadband enabled area?
-
If you have a DSL connection, which most everyone does by now, you shouldn't have any problem.
please think about posts you make...
please don't flame about something without real idea...
This is roleplaying game, it should be 50% or more based on character skills. It's up on player if it would be 100% player based pvp to choose how good his character is so it's same as now with roleplaying fight.
:whistling:
-
However, in this context I don't, for one simple reason: lag. Even the best of us lag around a bit. For the worst of us, combat will be impossible due to lag, which means (at least for now) they'll have no way of getting decent experience.
If you have a DSL connection, which most everyone does by now, you shouldn't have any problem.
I have the fastest DSL connection available, and I still get quite a bit of lag sometimes.
Still, if Idoru had a strong, champion character (he is the leader of a prominent guild), and I had a weak, frail insane character (which I do), I could still beat him easily just because no matter how 'skilled' at pressing buttons Idoru is, there'll always be a 2 minute gap between the buttons he presses and the actions that are performed, which I could easily take advantage of.
-
I'm not trying to offend anyone here, but the fact of the matter is that someone who lags will always be at a disadvantage unless we go to a turn based system (which I'm not entirely against). It happens, not everyone can run the game. In other rpg's you won't be able to chug potions as efficiently as the other guy etc.
Now, understand that I'm not suggesting that it should stay as it is. However, just about every rpg has a 'margin of error' between levels. What I'm saying is this should be dealt with by player skill instead of dumb luck. Basically when someone's within 10 or 20 levels of the other it becomes based on player skill. This mantains the roleplaying element of it, but at the same time keeps it interesting.
And finally, yes, we all lag sometimes. However, my point is that the majority of the time you will not have significant lag with a decent connection.
-
Or how about as a trial run it could be an optional sellection.
That way if you see it lags you can take it off although puting yourself at a dissadvantage in duels.
But that has obvious flaws (dont tell me about them ok ?) so how about it being a duel option made before dueling.
That way we would also make a greater spectacle for the tournaments because it wouldnt be two guys runing around but more like a quick bloodbath (i love that word) where the first mistake takes you down.Also it would make more sense that someone who has fought his entire life with swords would instinctively be tough with axes simply because he knows the combinations of blocking side steeping and attacking.
Also i think daggers should have a VERY small rate of parry (for those who dont know parrying is blocking an attack with your weapon).
While swords would have a quite high chance due to their lenght.
-
However, my point is that the majority of the time you will not have significant lag with a decent connection.
Sorry about the delay in replying to this. But, I (and presumably others) do have signifigant lag all the time and I dont have a decent connection.
-
already addressed, please read my other posts :)
-
I'm not trying to offend anyone here, but the fact of the matter is that someone who lags will always be at a disadvantage unless we go to a turn based system (which I'm not entirely against). It happens, not everyone can run the game. In other rpg's you won't be able to chug potions as efficiently as the other guy etc.
Now, understand that I'm not suggesting that it should stay as it is. However, just about every rpg has a 'margin of error' between levels. What I'm saying is this should be dealt with by player skill instead of dumb luck. Basically when someone's within 10 or 20 levels of the other it becomes based on player skill. This mantains the roleplaying element of it, but at the same time keeps it interesting.
And finally, yes, we all lag sometimes. However, my point is that the majority of the time you will not have significant lag with a decent connection.
That was your last post and I fail to see where it is addressed other than what seems to be the sentiment 'deal with it'.
My idea to remove lag effects; Start the attack timing when both players have clicked attack, not when just the first has. This way the combat would not be affected by lag. It would also seem to be the way the Devs had intended duels to be. Two people stood toe - to - toe and letting the stats, skills, and mainly the engine sort out the combat.
-
Personally I think it is unfortunate you do not have dsl or cable available but we don't make allowances for people running on old hardware without 3d acceleration either. Sad to say, I think this is a minimum equipment issue more than anything else. There is a certain amount of lag associated with distance from the server, but if you just don't have the bandwidth should it be the games problem?
-
Basically what I was trying to get at.
-
I would suggest to make combat somewhat like it is in Strategy Games
Tactical and strategic side of skills are player-based - Retreating, Combat style used, Multiple stances, Which spell to cast, which weapons are better for a specific enemy, Terrain advantages(Being on top would give a character defensive bonus for example), and combined forces for "guild" wars(So the position of a "commander" in a military "guild" would make sense as the way characters are positioned would influence on the way combat happens. IE: A "wedge" formation would give an offensive bonus while "phalanx" would give a defensive one and so on).
Having a fully character-based "combat" like in "The Sims"(where you click on someone your "Sim" dislikes and then on "go for a fight" and just watch it) would be as interesting as watching an ant walking on a table. Still there could exist an "automatic" option like in some turn-based classic CRPGs, but taking over the tactical and strategic part of a combat as the player is usually better, as making a believable game AI for such things isn't an easy deal anyway.
Combat skills are character based(or "unit" skills based in Strategy Games), and thus if you lack a good connection or dexterity with a keyboard and mouse it wouldn't influence in any form.
Still such idea would work better on a turn-based combat system in my opinion.
Real-time in one way or another will rely on players agility.
-
I don't think player skills in combat is what we are after.
God forbid...
However, in this context I don't, for one simple reason: lag. Even the best of us lag around a bit. For the worst of us, combat will be impossible due to lag, which means (at least for now) they'll have no way of getting decent experience.
If you have a DSL connection, which most everyone does by now, you shouldn't have any problem.
I dont. As I said in a previous post. Should I have to play a slow, weak and poorly trained character just because I have the misfortune to not live in a broadband enabled area?
I have 650ping dial up. Doesnt hurt my dueling SKILL 'that' much.
-
See, I'd at least like SOME interaction between me and the combat, rather than just click and sit.
That gets Boring, lame and all round drives away the player basde. Player skills still allow you to roleplay but they put a bit more interaction around the game, rather than havng everything just run on the game mechanics.
-
It takes player influence to navigate terrain.
It takes player influence to climb on the roof of the Broken Door.
It takes player influence to get into the Laanx dungeon and navigate the thin paths.
It takes player influence to play Groffeltoe.
It takes player influence to answer riddles in quests.
If the arguments against player-influence were strictly valid...
Our characters should automatically navigate Yliakum based on their willpower, intelligence, hunger, thirst and aspirations based on our char-generation.
Our characters should automatically play Groffeltoe with the outcome determined primarily by statistics such as intelligence.
Our characters should be able to answer the riddles in quests by themselves based on their intelligence, not based on player intelligence.
...and so on..
If you don't like player-skill-influenced PvP... why not roll a dice and RP the rest?
Failing that... you could always have 2 forms of combat?
- One form of combat... for those with (a) antiquated technology (b) the dexterity of a fish ...or... (c) a general dislike for player-influence in combat. - Make it purely stats/die-roll based, you start the fight, you stare at the screen... you either win or lose.
- Another form of combat... for those that find player-influence makes the duels more fun and exciting.
For me, player-skill involvement makes the duels a LOT more fun.
At least, it's a lot more fun to me... rather than starting a fight and waiting to see whether you win or lose.
-
There's a difference between puzzle-solving and... whatever it is that you want to call the present duel system.
-
^^ And there are similarities, such as dependence on player-skill/influence. ;)
-
Actualy player skill would also once and for all deny the almighty high damadge weapon invunerability.
If i can block your hits and counter attack it wont matter if im beating you with a stick will it ?
Anywaysits hard to find arguments while headbanging so maybe ill post something later.
PS:Drah does have a good point
-
^^ And there are similarities, such as dependence on player-skill/influence. ;)
Puzzle solving is intellectual though. To win duels, you have to be cheap, not smart.
-
The main point behind all this is it's a matter of opinion.
Sure, Drah, you have a good point. But at the same time it's a battle between RP and Enjoyment, as is everything.
RPwise, it should all be character skill.
Enjoyment-wise, it should be mostly player skill.
I'm sure we both agree on this.
You did slippery slope of RP, with everything being characterskill, slippery slope is an annoying argumentative strategy considering it has a huge chance to backfire.
Damage is character skill,
Weight carried is character skill,
Weapon quality (when making is character skill,
Why not have everything playerskill?
Make PS into an FPS.
The large ideas behind mmoRPGs are, in my opinion:
1. You are somebody else.
2. Your character has to practice to become better.
3. Your character isn't you.
Now, the large ideas behind Planeshift:
1. It's free.
2. It can run on most machines.
3. mmoRPG stuffeses.
Now, if you concentrate on points 2 of both lists you find valid arguments against Player skill based pvp system.
1. People with faster reflexes IRL will win out. (Against RP)
2. People bring OOC skill into the game. (Against RP)
3. People with better computers will win out. (Against RP)
This is the tip of the iceberg of course.
Now, I understand that some Player Skill must be involved, as I said, it makes it more enjoyable. But it certainly shouldn't be mainly Player Skill. If anything, Player Skill should be there for the odd win against somebody better than you and for deciding battles between two players of very similar character skill.
I'm in no way defending the current PvP system, I don't even know it, to be honest.
(I'll probably rewrite this in a bit, it's poorly written to say the least :P)
-
Make the physical skills of combat character-based, tactical, and strategic(for "guild" wars), elements dependent on players, It wouldn't be cool to end up with something like the way fights with neighbours happen in "The Sims", where we only click on the other sim, "go for a fight" and watch it having no influence on the final outcome. FPSes are mostly no-brainers(exceptions: Thief series, System Shock series and Deus Ex, you'll have difficulties if you play any of these the way you play a typical FPS), if they are the antithesis of what Planeshift intends to be, then it should focus on having mind-challeging player skills instead of just being a demonstration of a virtual world where we passively watch our characters doing whatever they like(that would be the only way to eliminate completely player skills from the equation).
I already suggested how to give some tactical depth
http://hydlaa.com/smf/index.php?topic=28378.msg326610#msg326610 (http://hydlaa.com/smf/index.php?topic=28378.msg326610#msg326610)
Also things like rain(decreases slightly accuracy for ranged weapons), terrain(being in a higher location should give your character a defensive bonus, and in the case of ranged weapons, attack bonus too), light(dark places would give advantages for races with night vision - or for someone with a night vision spell if it exists - while bringing disadvantages for those without it in combat, same with day and night). In other words: the environment should have a strong influence on the way combat happens.
I hope it will not end up like:
Yes, but if the combat itself will be entirely based on character skills, having a tactical edge of it would make things more interesting and challenging than just "sit and watch your lvl 25 character kill another lvl 25 character because you got a lucky dice roll".
Wait, in a certain form, "luck" is also a player skill, so we would have to eliminate the random factor too, alongside the capability of the player influencing on the decisions of the characters, who would be completely independent AIs we could not control, but simply watch. Now we got a 100% character-skill based game.
3. mmoRPG stuffeses.
RPG stuff is better, as none of the games of the genre(MMORPG) I know, 'cept for PS, have RP. If models to serve as inspiration for PS are being looked for, perhaps Neverwinter Nights or a D&D rulebook would be a better choice than WoW or other of the MMOGs
-
1. People with faster reflexes IRL will win out. (Against RP)
2. People bring OOC skill into the game. (Against RP)
3. People with better computers will win out. (Against RP)
My suggestions:
1: Faster writers on keyboard are quickier (against RP) - forbid dvorak on PS
2: Knowlage of language brings ooc skill, and big knowlage of tales too (against RP) - forbid all native english, only people who aren't good readers should be allowed to play
3: same as 1, you have better keyboard you win.
It's not much about fast reflex, if you are wise and you don't just run mad on your enemy you don't need much reflex..
OOC skill starts with knowlage of area and so, its only on player how much lost his new char will be if he already knows area, same with duels, good dueler have to choose how good he is. And its pretty hard to kill someone with weak weapons when your oponent needs only one hit to kill you.. oh and I forgot that if peoplw sould use less offensive stances, weaker chars won't have chance to hit...
People with better computers doesn't win out as there are some requirements for how and all pcs above that shouldn't have problems (it's problem of bad writen requirements and realy heavy engine)...
-
Raleigh: Good point. RP stuffeses then :P
As for the rest, it is about fast reflexes, timing and such, Socia. Granted, common sense does play a big part but, that doesn't mean reflexes don't.
It's still OOC skill, Socia. Anything you can do that your character isn't taught how to do is OOC skill.
And yes, there are requirements, but those are minimum requirements. If you've ever played WoW or EQ2 (I played both, Wow for a couple weeks, EQ2 for a few months) and participated in PvP you'd know this. Lag always strikes. It just strikes better computers less.
And you are referring, in the main, to the old PvP system. I don't think anybody wants that to be the system permanently, it's not what I was arguing against.
As I said, some Player Skill adds enjoyment to the PvPing. But I would never have a mainly Player Skill PvP system.
-
Well, this is why I pose the idea of having two combat systems, it may not seem the most practical solution... but it would mean people who enjoy either aspect could still enjoy it, and potentially make both branches/styles of combat more enjoyable.
I don't even mind turn-based combat as long as there's some decision making as a player... but it still doesn't beat the excitement that's possible from what I'll call "live" combat for lack of a better description. (which unfortunately, as much as some hate it... does depend quite a lot on player-skill... or... "cheating" / "being cheap" as some wish to refer to it.)
I'm not denying that 'live' combat employs a lot of player-skill, has flaws due to lags and isn't very IC for several reasons, it's also unfair to those with poor connections and weak computers... but it is still fun, and a lot of players that I know do enjoy it, even some on dial-up... and I don't just mean "my circle of friends" ... I mean LOTS of people.
I'm just wondering if there's anyway that people who enjoy different styles of combat could be catered for. - Rather than making the current one pushed to one extreme or the other.
1)"turn-based" combat, more true to RP, etc.
2) "live" combat... stats, weapons have effect.. and to quite a high degree... players skill too, why not!?
You could make turn-based the default and make it so that both sides would have to agree to "live" combat because of how it is unfair on some players... if both don't chose "live"... use the default "turn-based" to keep things fair.
This would also add diversity to the types of tournaments that could be held. Some "live", some "turn-based".
I know... the idea will probably get shot down anyway... because it'll make development awkward, it'll 'draw the wrong crowd' or something. I was just pondering what possibilities there are because I know a lot of people like both types of combat. ;)
-
Sure, Drah, you have a good point. But at the same time it's a battle between RP and Enjoyment, as is everything.
Shouldn't RP be enjoyable?
I like to think of my own personal skill as being my characters natural abilities in the field.
-
Sure, Drah, you have a good point. But at the same time it's a battle between RP and Enjoyment, as is everything.
Shouldn't RP be enjoyable?
I agree.
Basically, I'd like to see combat be less like mortal combat and more like a game of bridge. Obviously it will end up somewhere in the middle, but right now it's just an arcade game.
-
SO are you guys litereally intending on click watch, click watch, cast a spell occasionally get bored leave?
I'm not saying that you should press buttons to initiate an attack, dodge whatever, but come on!
I'd ask for some character skills and actions to use, rather than a runescape lookalike combat system.
I know that RP is the central focus on this game and I;m happy with that, but at the same time there should be a decent amount of focus on gameplay.
I at least would like to not be idle and watching whilst stuff happens o screen. You would end with an increasingly stagnating game...
A 3D version of runescape, but with a better community.
-
SO are you guys litereally intending on click watch, click watch, cast a spell occasionally get bored leave?
I'm not saying that you should press buttons to initiate an attack, dodge whatever, but come on!
I'd ask for some character skills and actions to use, rather than a runescape lookalike combat system.
I know that RP is the central focus on this game and I;m happy with that, but at the same time there should be a decent amount of focus on gameplay.
I at least would like to not be idle and watching whilst stuff happens o screen. You would end with an increasingly stagnating game...
A 3D version of runescape, but with a better community.
Unfortunatelly there seems to be a "tea time lobby" that wishes to make of PlaneShift an Utopia for chatting with friends like in some kind of 3D IM in a roleplay fashion and scold all those who like a minimal amount of action and dynamism.
I would like to see combat where players wouldn't be mindless and passively watching like in *cough*RUNESCAPE*cough*, but need to use their intelligence(Don't come with that "character intelligence" talk again as there is no way to implement a real A.I.) to make tactical decisions on the fly, while the agility with a mouse is not important at all, as the physical part of the combat would be dealt by the character skills then. And remember that gameplay that requires intelligence isn't as 1337-friendly as a system where all you have to do is to powerlevel and then you'll have an almost asured pwnage as "teh l33t". Everything based on character skills mean 0 challenge, 0 challenge means anybody can do it easily, and that it'll always be boring as well. Remember that this is a game as well and a game without fun is contraditory, roleplaying is to augment this fun, not to hinder it.
-
What makes an argument for using mental skill in a game any better than one for using physical skill?
-
... Make of PlaneShift an Utopia for chatting with friends like in some kind of 3D IM in a roleplay fashion.
Sounds preferable.
I at least would like to not be idle and watching whilst stuff happens o screen. You would end with an increasingly stagnating game...
A 3D version of runescape, but with a better community.
The good things about the Planeshift community come from its emphasis on creativity and its distaste for PVP.
-
What makes an argument for using mental skill in a game any better than one for using physical skill?
A "game" where no player skill is required at all is an interactive movie/book, not a game, and passive experience = boredom. And mental skills gives some challenge and normally are easier to master by adult people, who usually are the best roleplayers around.
... Make of PlaneShift an Utopia for chatting with friends like in some kind of 3D IM in a roleplay fashion.
Sounds preferable.
IRC can do that pretty well, just open a #Planeshift_Roleplay, tell people to read the Settings and write a character sheet and mail it to some IRC-Op before talking IC there, and PS would be pretty much redundant in that case. I don't get why there are so many people wishing to spoil PlaneShift potential venues by wanting to suggest things to turn it into another typical and boring RPG, gameplay-wise. Because in Planeshift, as a game, roleplay and gameplay coexist and should preferably be linked and not opposed as in the alpha levelling system of now, and character skills can be harmful to roleplay as well. The leet won't stop being a bad RPer because all is 100% character based(something I already mentioned that is not possible), instead they will level and level their character until reaching the top and start their "pwnage" then. In fact too many character skills encourage powerlevelling. To turn PlaneShift in an "utopia for chatting like in some kind of 3D IM in a roleplay fashion" is an utter waste of the potential of this project, as for that, even a text-based MUD would be too much. I don't see any reason to reply to more posts, as I have to check if that was serious or is another bait to push a unnecessary lock, or perhaps that reply was just a load of sarcasm.
-
If you go back and read what i said at the start of this thread you will see an example game:Gothic or Gothic 2.Ive played both of them and i can tell you that as far as the reaction claim goes im just laughing at it.It took me an average gaming day to learn the basic combinations to stay safe.And about a week of casual gaming to master the "Twin side-step".
If you will believe me then mastering the fighting in that game takes more practice than reaction.And as far as lag beeing a subject i think that is something that NO system in general can avoid.Unless the PS devs make the most insanely short and effective comand for it.But other than that lag is here for good.And as for Player skill beeing a question i would like to add that the characters start as grown-ups so the player skill could be the basic knowlege that they got through their life up to that point.And the continuos improvement of that skill would allow for great fighters to come up with their own combinations.In other words if you looked at things a litle more inovative friendly then you would have seen such a simple point long ago.
Also as Raleigh said RP should help a game be fun.Not shoot down ideas that make a game fun.(And dont say im a newbie or an RP hater)
PS:It is me Quitarias.I just posted with my friends account :p.
-
The good things about the Planeshift community come from its emphasis on creativity and its distaste for PVP.
This is true, but that statement I guess was actually more just based on PVE or PVP. I know this is in the PVP subforum but I find it dissettleing that people want and point, click, watch game...
-
In reference to some posts, ooc case of intelligence and fighting skills were often disputed in the tabletop communities, I believe.
There were those who believed it should all depend on character skills and there were those who believed character skills should be greatly controlled by the player.
Personally, I've been always supporter of the latter.
Why? The creativity.
The former case often led to situations when playing a tabletop would be all about rolling dice. Boring, and that can be compared to the limitating game mechanics. As a GM I never allowed situation when Intelligence roll would give the player a solution to a problem. Intelligence rolls were reserved for such cases as perception or fields of knowledge not possessed by the player. Bribing and lying? You first had to come up with some swift talk before you were even allowed a Charisma roll. Yes, much was depending on the player, but that was the beauty of the tabletop games. About combat, it was generally rewarded when you came up with a good strategy. If GM was in a good mood, describing how you attack could give you some advantage over the enemy. Battlecries and role-playing intimidating was good too.
So yeah, I can say I'm all for player's involvement in the character.
But this having been said, some of the suggestions here are really... how should I say it, faulty.
Mad strafing and other keyboard combinations aren't the only way to make combat entertaining. They won't enrich role-play either. From what I've seen it looks much more like some circus show, rather than actual duel. Pardon the expression, but it simply looks downright stupid.
So let me go this way:
Let's start with duel that is all about standing face to face. Boring, right? Even more boring when the fight looks like a repetetive exchange of blows.
I'd keep the former, but kick out the latter. Basically standing face to face and characters not doing anything, unless commanded by the players.
Now about the commands:
Replace defensive/normal/bloody with actual combat actions. Strong attack, fast attack, normal attack, faked attack, prepare to dodge, prepare to parry/block.
Some bar ashould go down with extend depending on how much effort it takes to perform particular action (and no action should be allowed until the bar is regained to some point). This should be balanced (slow) enough to make it depend less on the lag or ability to make fast decisions. Additionally prepare to parry should be the action of choice if player hasn't chosen anything by himself. It should only allow the player to create some tactics and enjoy involvement in the fight. It shouldn't allow the player to take superiority thanks to the personal player skills.
And it should be enjoyable to watch.
Obviously, casting magic would take up the bar in a similar way.
So to sum up:
Player involvement? Yes.
Player skills? No.
-
I admit the inferriority of my idea compared to Draklar's.That one is pure genius.Depends on both the player using his tactical knowlege and the stats he has.And shouldnt lag to much.Anyone who gives a better idea gets a cookie.
-
Draklar's idea would work even better on a fully turn-based combat system, I don't know why, but I always preferred turn-based for both RPGs and Strategy Games, because it makes the game much less dependent on the player quickness than real-time combat. Real-time is usually more suitable for FPSes, and as we don't want a "1337 Cr3w" of unbeatable PvPers in PlaneShift(And by myself I'm an average FPSer anyway though I do better in teamplay, the reason why I prefer team-based combat games than deathmatch on such genre). Don't shy from it. The classic Final Fantasy from SNES were turn-based, Civilization series are turn-based, Fallout 1 and 2 are turn-based and are greater games than many real-time combat RPGs and RTSes. In fact, the most fun and still character-based combat system I ever found in a RPG was Fallout 2's one (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallout_2#Changes_from_Fallout_1)(though player influence made a huge difference on the success an failure of it). Would be quite challenging to implement though, I know. Action Points, ability to retreat multiple times, allowing a battle to go beyond its original starting position. But if I am to defend a PvP system, I would like to see one inspired by that game combat system.
Also, in Fallout 2, if you started to go trigger-happy on innocent people in a city, the whole city NPCs would take on arms to attempt to kill you. Usually it resulted in death, though sometimes I managed to wipe out an entire city :devil:
-
I give Draklar's views a +1.
-
In Fallout 2 you controled a team in an NPC world.That the bigest stoper for TB PvP in Planeshift.Its real time unless the devs turn everything regardless of state.Because if i am chasing two people who stole something valuable and a person who i could kill with a single blow will still slow me down until he makes his moves and i make mine.That would mean th other one gets away and the system could be abused.
Personaly id prefer Draklar's sugestion as it fits right in to the Planeshift frame.It requires skill.Not so much reaction time.And i was thinking that you could use balance as a bar for the action performed.Anyones who has ever tried swinging a sword (wodden or real) knows that it realy throws you of key.But on the bright side if your opponent is weaker than you you have a chance to finish him quicly.If he is equaly as strong than you play a 50 50 gamble.And if he is stronger than you then you basicaly sign your own death certificate.
-
i think there will always be a desire somewhere in the PS community for player skill vs player skill. though this is not the system the Devs have chosen, and it makes sense, you can't really call it a RPG if the main PvP system is based on OOC skill. personally, i love pitting myself against others skill wise, which is why i started making my little RP dueling system. there is always that road to take if you don't like the current PvP system, make you own /roll based or rp based system for use with you and your friends.
-
i think there will always be a desire somewhere in the PS community for player skill vs player skill. though this is not the system the Devs have chosen, and it makes sense, you can't really call it a RPG if the main PvP system is based on OOC skill. personally, i love pitting myself against others skill wise, which is why i started making my little RP dueling system. there is always that road to take if you don't like the current PvP system, make you own /roll based or rp based system for use with you and your friends.
Designing your character and its stats involves skill. The problem is that if you can max out everything, then you don't have to make any decisions so less skill is required.
-
i think there will always be a desire somewhere in the PS community for player skill vs player skill. though this is not the system the Devs have chosen, and it makes sense, you can't really call it a RPG if the main PvP system is based on OOC skill. personally, i love pitting myself against others skill wise, which is why i started making my little RP dueling system. there is always that road to take if you don't like the current PvP system, make you own /roll based or rp based system for use with you and your friends.
Designing your character and its stats involves skill. The problem is that if you can max out everything, then you don't have to make any decisions so less skill is required.
I usually only take time to create characters in PlaneShift because it's hard to find the right combination of life events/etc. for the type of character(regarding stats and skills) that I wish to create. Otherwise it's mostly a breeze, same with character levelling when I did it, something that I never had to waste a single neuron to think about, because it requires no thought as it's quite obvious(just continue the original character idea). The WoW l33t have little difficulties on making a good starting character to reach the level cap quickly than a bad one or to excel in combat better since from the beggining, for example, and it is really obvious for any situation or game(Charisma for the fast talkers, Agility for thieves and ranged weapons, etc.)
Then it becomes a completely automatic action, just like typing or grinding. And as I don't believe in RL luck and much less that an hypothetical IRL luck would influence on the result of a random number generator, then there is no skill involved at all for most of the combat. Just mindlessly click on the enemy, sit down, hope for a lucky roll and watch. I would just watch a war movie. That's why I rarely used the in game PvP system, and that I rarely engage into PvE as well(besides the dull grind of course).
The only thing that truly involves skill in PlaneShift is designing good and original characters' life histories and personalities, something that unfortunately seems a bit underhanded right now. Now if you want pure and passive dice rolling and no player influence or need to interfere, you should play poker or a gambling game instead. As now combat is just a "gamble" of who will get the better rolls.
P.S.: I'm full of seeing "Go play a FPS!" misjudgements about people who want a less boring and more active combat system, so this last comment is an ironic twist of that old and beaten up thing.
-
Personally, I think that your life history should be independent from your stats. The same things may happen to different individuals, but each individual will take something different away from the event.
-
Personally, I think that your life history should be independent from your stats. The same things may happen to different individuals, but each individual will take something different away from the event.
If you want the character generation to be realistic then you need to make a branch effect.....Sort of.As im sure we all know experiences define who you are and what you are like.So each event would have effects upon your character that would effect ALL later events.If you were a good student but had a weak body then you wouldnt get as much from fighting and training events.And vice versa.
Also age would come into play as we are more easily effected when we are young.A six year old seeing a mass murder will be hit harder than a fourteen year old.Also birth events should have the detriminal effect on you.If you were born solely thanks to magic then you are going to have incredible affinity for it.But you still could become a warrior but it would take extra effort.And these events would have to stay with your character.It would have to effect him up until you delete him.But in any case thats geting off topic.
-
If you were a good student but had a weak body then you wouldnt get as much from fighting and training events.
Fighting teaches discipline and self-confidence. You do not need to be a body builder in order to gain something from training.
-
I agree with Zanzi and Entevir (who said the same thing, if you read closely). A student who had a weak body could still gain the same knowledge in fighting as a stronger student, but will not have the ability to use that knowledge to the same extent. You can learn the technique to lift someone over your head and toss them, but without the strength to back it up to practice it, you will not learn the actual move.
So, as Zanzi said, you will gain something from the training. But also as Entevir said, you will not gain as much.
I am of the cental view on PvP. Your character should have to be taught (or created with) all the skills, stances, and moves he needs to fight, but it should be the player who decides exactly how those skills, stances, and moves are used.
I absolutly hate it when the server tells me where my character is hitting the other person, and uses a random roll to say how hard. My fighting character is very honorable, and would never hit below the waist, or stab a lady in the face. ;)
-
My fighting character is very honorable, and would never hit below the waist, or stab a lady in the face. ;)
Honour is 100% subjective.
-
But UtM does have a point (thats been brought up before).We should be able to control at least where we hit.If someone is wearing heavy armor everywhere exept his hands and you have daggers then you wuld most likely aim for the hands to beat(disarm) him.
You could set it on random if your to lazy to do it yourself.Or you could attack with a bit more precission.Inaway it would mean the difrence between a smart fighter and a skilled one.
-
But UtM does have a point (thats been brought up before).We should be able to control at least where we hit.If someone is wearing heavy armor everywhere exept his hands and you have daggers then you wuld most likely aim for the hands to beat(disarm) him.
You could set it on random if your to lazy to do it yourself.Or you could attack with a bit more precission.Inaway it would mean the difrence between a smart fighter and a skilled one.
I think we need to hear from someone with real life experience.
-
I think if your opponent is wearing heavy armour you aim to knock them over, but that's slightly off topic. Being able to have a target area of the body is a good idea but you may hit other areas if your aren't very skilful.
-
Probably for the same reason we have elves but no dragons, undead grendols but no vampires. Personal preference on part of the dev team in deciding how parts of the game should function.
So basicaly... too much of a pain in the ass to code then? It makes sense to have player skill involved because otherwise your not 'playing' and surely the idea of a game is to play it? Like people have said, if we cant control, we might as well go watch a movie.
I'm thinking of a really bad MMO that starts with the letter..... R......
-
I realize I am about to rez a dead topic however this cannot go unsaid.
The PVP system in PS at the moment fails. Gothic's combat system is simple but highly effective. It adds strategy and skill to a fight. I do not think it fair that at the moment running through your oponent while the other is squished with lag is fair, especially considering the epic lag on the server.
For those of you who say that we don't want player control skills influencing combat.... think about what you are saying before you post :) It makes absolutely no sense. :whistling:
Thank you.
-
I realize I am about to rez a dead topic however this cannot go unsaid.
The PVP system in PS at the moment fails. Gothic's combat system is simple but highly effective. It adds strategy and skill to a fight. I do not think it fair that at the moment running through your oponent while the other is squished with lag is fair, especially considering the epic lag on the server.
For those of you who say that we don't want player control skills influencing combat.... think about what you are saying before you post :) It makes absolutely no sense. :whistling:
Thank you.
Just a side note (though I am in complete agreement with what sov is saying)
The new dueling system makes hit and run impossible, you have to stand still, and face the enemy, to attack. Despite this lag is still an issue, and often the winner of duels. If only we had a turn based dueling system. *hint*
-
I am still gunning for a completely character-skill based PvP system, with complete player-skill control.
-
The new dueling system makes hit and run impossible, you have to stand still, and face the enemy, to attack. Despite this lag is still an issue, and often the winner of duels. If only we had a turn based dueling system. *hint*
Uh ... huh? New dueling system? Did I miss something?
-
The new dueling system makes hit and run impossible, you have to stand still, and face the enemy, to attack. Despite this lag is still an issue, and often the winner of duels. If only we had a turn based dueling system. *hint*
Uh ... huh? New dueling system? Did I miss something?
Its not new anymore, it used to be that you could do hit and run attacks.. Now you can't initiate attcks unless you're within touching distance. Thus hit and run is impossible.
I should say 'current' dueling system
-
Heh, I'd say 'old' dueling system, as this recently added range check is already history now ;)
-
why not make it a choice for players to rely on their skill or the computers...er...watch and wait style, with benefits to it for instance:
*players who do skill will be more prone to movement, so they use more stamina.
^players who take up a stance, and stand there ground have a center of balance, and use less stamina, and hit more accurately
*players who use skill based get dodge and def. bonuses
^players who use tried-and true stances gain offensive enhancements
*players who use skill based can pick their target attack area(specified by tendency, i.e., set it up on the numeric keypad)
^players who use the watch style character's will attack what they think is best to attackin the current situation.
etc......
-
I personally love how so many people hated the idea of having soem control and interaction during combat instead of sitting thereand wasiting for it to play out.
Oh no! Some gameplay elements? What madness is this!?
Seriously, we all know that this gme is centred around RP, but then again if you wanted a fully RP game you might as well have continued with the original MUD version. Someone tell me a good reason why this idea of player skill and interactivity is such terrible thing?
I'm personnally going to say that this type of thing would require a total overhual ofthe combat system - there is no point in having one combat system for NPC's and another for players, it wouldn't work out very well really. But the point still stands - player interactive combat is NOT a bad thing. player interactive anythign is NOT a bad thing. Looks at games everywhere - the line of progression has gone from sitting - watching - waiting - repeat , to affecting - changing - interacting with whatever you are doing. Why? because it's what keep's people interested.
-
Seriously, we all know that this gme is centred around RP, but then again if you wanted a fully RP game you might as well have continued with the original MUD version. Someone tell me a good reason why this idea of player skill and interactivity is such terrible thing?
One word = lag
-
Three words.
Optimum game performance.
Two more.
Sometime later.
-
I don't dislike the fact that a weak player can defeat a stronger character because they are better at dueling, but i do dislike that some players have better hardware than others, and so with the "hit and run" dueling players with a worse computer system end up losing because of too much lag. I've seen players repeatedly cast useless, but very graphic spells just so that their opponent lags into defeat. Perhaps something should be done to end hit and run dueling, but not a simple stop and watch your char fight duel, that would be a bit overboard.