PlaneShift

Gameplay => Wish list => Topic started by: Arch Angel on July 22, 2003, 01:40:42 am

Title: Fighting style
Post by: Arch Angel on July 22, 2003, 01:40:42 am
I think that the monters need to be in the 3d world and you should be able to fight them by moving forward and attacking them by pressing a button to block with your sheild and another to use your weapon this makes it so its intirely the players skill
Title:
Post by: Drilixer on July 22, 2003, 01:50:40 am
there are some good games like this but...  well I don\'t feal like flaming for some reason... wow - if done well your system might be good so long as it is balanced so that it isn\'t JUST skill afterall when you have been leveling for a while you want that to mean something - this isn\'t a FPS game
Title:
Post by: Bombyz on July 22, 2003, 06:12:51 am
You should make it so that block attack only works if you time it right. You cant just block forever.
Title:
Post by: Drilixer on July 22, 2003, 06:23:50 am
I would rather we use the D&D setup and stay as far from your FPS idea as possible
Title:
Post by: Hayden on July 22, 2003, 06:29:59 am
For a good example of FPS RPGing done right, look at Morrowind.  The game did it well, without detracting from game play or the RPG element.  There are, of course, hundereds of examples of RPG in which everything is \"Automatic\", however, I pefer the idea of Baldur\'s Gate: Combat and dodging are automatic, but you could run away and cast spells at your liesure (for the most part).  Either way is effective, and I think either one would serve Plane Shift well, if done correctly, as Drilixer said
Title:
Post by: Drilixer on July 22, 2003, 06:33:44 am
Morrowind is a good example - Planeshift seems to have gotten alot of ideas from Bethesda
Title:
Post by: Fanomatic2000 on July 22, 2003, 09:39:13 am
Quote
For a good example of FPS RPGing done right, look at Morrowind. The game did it well, without detracting from game play or the RPG element.


LOL  :D
Title:
Post by: PokannickNow on July 22, 2003, 10:46:58 am
I still prefer a not fps combat system.
Try to imagine a morrowind combat with lag! Your command don\'t pass and a little rabbit can kill you!

i prefer a combat based on skill and dice rather than hitting key as quick as possible
Title:
Post by: Drilixer on July 22, 2003, 05:43:02 pm
Quote
Originally posted by PokannickNow
I still prefer a not fps combat system.
Try to imagine a morrowind combat with lag! Your command don\'t pass and a little rabbit can kill you!

i prefer a combat based on skill and dice rather than hitting key as quick as possible


I agree completely with PokannickNow -> hopefully there wont be lag *crosses fingers* but automation and random checks for basic combat moves like blocking etc etc would be the best way to go - the fps system for medieval weapons has never been done very well since even in morrowind there are clipping problems where you swing your sword and it goes through the other guys head and out his back and then does no damage... D&D type system is definately the way to go...
Title:
Post by: Wormtail_ on July 22, 2003, 06:58:09 pm
I believe that RPGs are based on the characters skill, not the playesrs skill. There are many who aren\'t that familiar with the keyboard, and there are those who are a little too familiar with the keyboard. Nay, I prefer a system of combat that rely on the skill of the character, not the player. And lag contributes to the reason as well.
Title:
Post by: shangralah on July 22, 2003, 07:02:47 pm
I dont care that much how they make the battle as long as its not too confusing and not like eq because almost everygame like this has battle like eq
Title:
Post by: Drilixer on July 22, 2003, 07:07:10 pm
I\'ve never played EQ could you explain their system briefly? - if you want just explain what you think is bad about it
Title:
Post by: zaphar on July 22, 2003, 11:06:19 pm
EQ\'s combat system:

-Melee combat is completely automatic.
-Spell casting is user driven. you click the spell and it fires/fizzles/misses/hits
-the one exception to the melee is the monk. He has a number of \"special abilities\" which are user driven like the spells

The Characters skill and level determines the likelihood of each action succeeding.
Title:
Post by: shangralah on July 23, 2003, 12:51:23 am
well put zaphar
Title:
Post by: zinder on July 23, 2003, 03:17:13 am
Quote
Originally posted by Wormtail_
I believe that RPGs are based on the characters skill, not the playesrs skill. There are many who aren\'t that familiar with the keyboard, and there are those who are a little too familiar with the keyboard. Nay, I prefer a system of combat that rely on the skill of the character, not the player. And lag contributes to the reason as well.


Fighting only based on character skill is a bad idea. Then there is no sense in fighting. Everyone looks at the statistics and know who has won, no thrill will i win against this mob or will i loose. Also start fight and watch is rarely immersive.
A RPG needs a good balance between character skill and player skill in combat. Extremes in both directions can and possibly will kill the fun.
Title:
Post by: Wedge on July 23, 2003, 03:36:19 am
Anyway, it sounds like it\'s just gonna be automatic, and you can just give suggestions on how you want your player to approach battle.  I can\'t say I really like it, just the way it looks.  What do I base that on?  Well this (http://www.planeshift.it/player_combat.html) of course.  It explains how some of the stats will be used too.  It\'s all theory so far, but that\'s just what is on the page.
Title:
Post by: Drilixer on July 23, 2003, 03:37:01 am
I disagree automated combat is much better than FPS combat in medieval games - just because I\'ve never seen an example of FPS style combat with swords that was very realistic/fun...  That said we should make it automated but give combatants a variety of \'attacks\', spells, and abilities that they can use in combat to make it more interesting - such as knockdow, disarm, etc etc...
Title:
Post by: zaphar on July 23, 2003, 03:51:53 am
Quote
Originally posted by zinder
Fighting only based on character skill is a bad idea. Then there is no sense in fighting. Everyone looks at the statistics and know who has won, no thrill will i win against this mob or will i loose. Also start fight and watch is rarely immersive.
A RPG needs a good balance between character skill and player skill in combat. Extremes in both directions can and possibly will kill the fun.


Actually you are wrong You don\'t always know who will win because a certain amount of randomness is inserted into the system. As a Bard in EQ I often took on opponents the stats said I would lose against. I even sometimes won. The key was in my use of spells and even the occasional back off to rest then re-attack. In short the traditional RPG style of combat is very playable and enjoyable.
Title:
Post by: zinder on July 23, 2003, 06:55:40 pm
I dont know EQ, so my question: You choose target and then your bard fires his spells completely automatic?
Or is it you which choose which spell when?
Title:
Post by: Mindari on July 24, 2003, 11:36:19 am
maybe u could have both, eg combat is automatic but during a fight u can \'override\' your standard attack with different commands eg. instead of automaticly blocking with a weapon u could press a key which would make u quickly jump back to evade(and similar changes for attacking), or maybe the automatic combat could be for defending and evading only, and in each turn of combat you have a set reaction time in which to choose ur attack and attack.

That would solve the problem of laggy-fights and make them more interesting at the same time :D
Title: Errrr...
Post by: Tok'ra on July 24, 2003, 11:57:36 am
Shouldn\'t this post be in the \"PvP,PK and Thieving\" arguing forum?  :D
Title:
Post by: zaphar on July 24, 2003, 02:29:10 pm
Quote
Originally posted by zinder
I dont know EQ, so my question: You choose target and then your bard fires his spells completely automatic?
Or is it you which choose which spell when?


I chose the spells and when to fire them. Bard magic was a very different animal in EQ its kind of hard to explain. I was actually able to fire three spells at once.
Title:
Post by: Draklar on July 24, 2003, 04:35:34 pm
I think current Combat Rules will work just fine...
Character\'s skills will be very important, but player will be able to use his tactics while fighting (i mean changing combat modes and so on...)
Title:
Post by: Jefka on July 24, 2003, 10:45:11 pm
yep but sorry to ask, what are current rules? i mean, is it first person, paused combats, and so on ?

\'cause as said I really hate a fps into planeshift
Title:
Post by: zinder on July 25, 2003, 03:36:08 am
Quote
Originally posted by zaphar
I chose the spells and when to fire them. Bard magic was a very different animal in EQ its kind of hard to explain. I was actually able to fire three spells at once.


So the ruleset allowed you to bring in your skill. It wasnt keybord or mouse manipulating, but more tactic. But it was clearly your skill, not the characters.

If you want to see an example of automatic combat look at Progress Quest.(its an extreme example, and its hardly fun, at least for me)
Title:
Post by: Drilixer on July 25, 2003, 03:54:03 am
this is an RPG not a FPS there has to be an incentive for playing *sigh*... I don\'t want to here about \"SkiLLz\" in this game - Planeshift is not like that.  This is a party fantasy role playing game and if we are going to throw out pking we might as well throw out this because the same players that usually shout about \'sKiLLz\' in a game are the grief-causers (a generalization true - but individual abnormalities to a rule do not disprove it)...  you may not understand that completely but it stands to reason that this conversation is outdated anyways since the devs are working on the fighting system as we speak and they wont scrap what they\'ve decided for any of the ideas on this board :P

I love this quote by Vengeance:

\"That sounds like a great game... but it isn\'t Planeshift\".
Title:
Post by: Draklar on July 26, 2003, 10:19:51 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Jefka
yep but sorry to ask, what are current rules? i mean, is it first person, paused combats, and so on ?

\'cause as said I really hate a fps into planeshift

I mean those (http://www.planeshift.it/player_combat.html)
Title:
Post by: Drilixer on August 02, 2003, 05:25:58 am
hehe i just read through it - i think my first character will be a thivk headed Kran on a leash wh defends his sorceress with his dumb thickheadedness and brute endurance (aka full defencive while the mage has fun)
Title:
Post by: Muzzle on August 02, 2003, 09:36:00 am
Quote
Originally posted by Tok\'ra
Shouldn\'t this post be in the \"PvP,PK and Thieving\" arguing forum?  :D

Not unless you think PvP means *only* PvP.  :D One assumes there will be critters and stuff to tussle with.

This doc (http://www.planeshift.it/player_combat.html) seems kind of... content-free.  Will combat be turn-based, or hard real-time?  Will all battles be 1-on-1?  I don\'t see how magic, ranged weapons, &c fit into combat.  Clearly this is just a very early design doc, but it would be nice to get a more detailed word from the devs on what combat will be like.  It\'s kind of hard to have interesting converstations with no information.

I don\'t think there\'s much danger of Planeshift being Quake-with-stats (which would suck), but dice-rolling without much interaction gets boring quick.  I\'m not a huge gamer, so I don\'t know a lot of games to compare against, but I\'d like to see a combat system in the spirit (spirit, mind you, not a copy of the mechanics) of the Final Fantasy games: soft real-time and very interactive, but focued on tactics, stats, and teamwork rather than twitchy reflexes and button-mashing.
Title:
Post by: Drilixer on August 02, 2003, 03:45:15 pm
... obviously the intended system is somewhat turn based since it has rounds so to speak (offencive, defencive, etc etc...) when was the last time you played a FPS that had rounds in combat?