A turn based Combat System

[Unnamed_Source]

In the land of beta, on the rolling hills of Soon™ these ideas are in full bloom...
 till then tough cookies and wishful dreaming.

This style of play would allow for RP to take full stride in combat scenarios where at the end of each round a plethora of motes can take place with out stopping the combat sequence to do so. This will also alleviate the indifference between player connection speeds and force the players to play with their characters stats and skills rather than with the server lag and stylized key combos. Like a game of chess(this) vs a game of dodgeball(now) with the handicap. Strategy as opposed to connection speeds and keyboard skills.

As the combat is initiated those characters involved are locked into a this system, anyone else attempting to engage in any way with those that are locked in will also be  locked in themselves. To the outside observer the characters involved will look like they are idle or link dead. with only the timely animation of the end of the round to indicate that the characters are in combat.

Once locked in combat each player will get a turn to either defend or attack according to their characters stats and skills. The offense will enter his choice first, then the defense, where up on the defense entering their choice, the round is initiated, the rolls calculated, and the results animated to show hits misses and what not. Then the rolls are reversed.

Think of it like a playing Madden on an Xbox. each round you get to choose from a line up of moves your character has developed from his skills and stats. Both the defense and offense get a turn to choose from their perspective lineups when both have made a choice the play is initiated and the action sequence is shown. Since the characters are locked in these freeze frames only the skills of the characters can come into play and not the latency or typing skills of the player.

A round can go as follows:
Player A attacks, initiating the combat sequence and locking both player A and B in the combat mode.
Player A picks an attack from his list, ending his turn.
Player B chooses a defense, anding his turn and initiating the round. moves are rolled with hits or misses shown in a stop motion animation.
Player B then chooses his offensive move,
Followed by player A choosing his defense, ending the second round and followed by the next animated sequence.
So on and so forth till there is a winner.

All the while the players can mote/RP all they wish in between the animated sequences. And taking the round animation one step forward with Role Play.

Like wise the skills of a player might allow them to attack twice per round, having the character reverse rolls ever other round, or the defender being able to detect the kind of attack that is coming and choosing a corresponding defense that best counters the attack.

Unfortunately to the dislike of everyone the combat with NPC/monsters will also have to be done this way.

The following are needed for this to be fully enjoyable:

1. A large assortment of combat moves both defensive and offensive for all the different arms and armor, for each weapon and armor skill. Weapons having more offensive then defensive(parry) moves and armor the opposite(shield bash). Each skill having key signature moves found only with that skill.

2. Atleast 2 and possibly 3 or 4 animated moves per action. Actions correspond for each type of attack and defence, with the 2 possible out comes of success and fail and maybe a critical fail and critical success, making it 3 or 4
 total animated sequences per move.

3. A new window menu that replaces all the others when a combat sequence is initiated. This new window like the button menu currently on top will display all the combat combat options allowed to that character with the current weapon and armor. switching from the offensive to defensive option according to the turn.  So all actions are taken though the combat system. At which point the combat ends, the regular line up of window and buttons are replaced back.

4. The option before the initiation of combat to have a timed or unlimited round time, for instance (A) having 30 sec to make a decision or forfeiting and having the computer choose for you vs (B) no time limit in between rounds. And the option to end the combat sequence after an X amount of time has elapsed. These options are for those with shaky connections and those fighting them. Or if real life calls.

5. The option to save the full animated sequences from start to stop as an mpeg to be enjoyed at a later date off game. With any motes spliced in the action. Like wise a text print out of the results of each round for later review.

6.In addition to this we need better targeting. One that will auto turn the characters according to the moves used so that they don't gradually start drifting apart but will stay with each intended target.

[Editors note, the last similar post was done in 2004]

I don't care if you like it,
And I don't care that you HATE it.
If you're going to post, post something constructive or don't post at all.
Give me the reasons why or the ways how. Feelings not accepted.(except by the owner)

[lanser]

Forgive me if I'm wrong but apart from the Player choosing the method of attack/defense each time, isn't that exactly what the game mechs are already doing? And why there is so much dispute as to whether moving etc is a use of ooc player skill rather than IC char skill?

[pedenel]

Why sequential turns tho?

Why not simultaneous where each player has a certain number of mental & physical points (derived from stats) to use and the player chooses his/her action (attack or defend and type of attack/defence) + movement, if any and then when both players are ready, the action is then animated?  Knowing an opponent and his/her style of combat would be an advantage and making this even more of a tactical battle.

As far as fighting monsters are concerned, I would like to see an auto option so I can choose bloody, aggressive, normal, and defensive options for monster battles if I want to take my chances rather than go through a battle with a rat (for example) turn by turn. Auto option should also have a retreat option that can be triggered at any time during the battle at which time an attempt to break off combat will be made each turn with success/failure depending on stats and rolls.

Depending on how this is implemented, it may mean that the current system of  levelling may have to be tweaked, radically revamped or replaced since currently monster combat is the only realistic way to gain PP to level at a pace most would consider satisfactory.

[Unnamed_Source]

Why sequential turns tho?

The reason for it is that the defender should always have the means to see what's coming, through skills and stats. If you have simultaneous moves then you are playing russian roulette as the defender, like a blind man even though you would know how to block a hit to the legs you would not see the low blow till after the roll.

Now, if you take this as a rule. having the players choose both offense and defense at the same time may prove difficult at best, since you got to reveal the intended blows to each party so they can choose the right defense. As i see, it would still mean a form of sequential attacks but instead of the A)offense then B)defense - end of round, it would be A)offense - B)offense then A)defense - B)defense - end of round(a bit confusing)

As far as fighting monsters are concerned...

A modification to number 4. where instead of player controled you opt out for computer controlled having the client choose all of combat options, much like it is now except you will also get he option of entering the turnbased system or when in there back out back out. also an option for pvp where all parties have to agree (push the button). this would mean no free play though, just to sit there and watch the action alternatively any player can initiate the "turn based" and force there others too. (NPC/mobiles would never force enter into "turn based")

**Wouldn't it be nice. to get more than 40exp for mining/smithing. but it would be even nicer to have mining/smithing exp/pp going into the jobs skill tree. but this is off topic and there will be no more discussions on it here.

[bilbous]

4. so the winner in a no-limit match would be the person with more time to waste NOT playing the game until the other person gets tired of waiting and concedes just to be able to do something else? A better idea would be a longer period time limit with optional extension should both parties agree as well as a no-decision out should one player become unresponsive. No decision bouts could be tracked so that abusers could be dissuaded from using it as a tactic for not losing an otherwise lost fight. I am not quite sure what the repercussions of such tracking would be or how it could be implemented.

[pedenel]

Point taken given the mechanics you outlined but if instead of attack high/mid/low, etc the mechanics allow the players to choose slightly broader actions will make it less of a russian roulette.

e.g. using the example you provided

Player A, initiating the combat sequence and locking both player A and B in the combat mode.
Player A chooses to charge opponent swinging sword/use shield bash (no action points left)
Player B chooses to raise his shield and hunkers down behind it (some of AP left)

Resolution:
Player A STR stat+ modifier rushing; Player B STR stat : rolls Player A fails, Player B has AP remaining and rolls for a counter-strike, Player B  succeed, roll success/failure; damage 50% less due to counter.

Players A & B then choose their next moves
So on and so forth till there is a winner.


What I'm trying to get at is that options involving broader actions with simultaneous turns rather than a specific attack/defence to a particular area could enhance the enjoyment of the this combat model as opposed to what I would describe, in an overly simplistic manner, a game of rock, paper & scissors.

My assumption here is that there will be no challenge and acceptance such as in the current dueling system.  Any formal duels will be prefaced by discussion between players at which point they will take positions within a certain distance of each other and combat would be initiated by one party or the other.

Anyhow, just my 2 cents

With respect to bilbous' comment about time, I'm assuming there will be a timer and each round will not be longer than 1 minute perhaps even less.

[Unnamed_Source]

4. Is there as an escape clause for REAL LIFE. When real life happens to intervene, the game always takes second stage. Unfortunately so does anyone else involved. Being that this is an open system with multiple users, you got to design a way out for all parties involved.

Unlimited play is for those that wish to RP and mote between rounds, giving them ample time to type with out the rush of a counter. The pursuit  of most RP'ers is not the end result but the trip getting there. This allows for the full enjoyment and reflection of each round. The only counter would a silent minute that the opt out flag (button some place in the combat menu/window) becomes solid and either party can use, with a yes/no pop up to make sure. This would be the way out in case one of the parties stop responding. No exchange of PvP points, it would be like nothing happened. Since there is no points exchange the, it is futile for any PK'er to use the opt out button.

This unlimited option can also work for those testing their skills/weapons as it allows for uninterrupted study of each move and weapon with out killing your opponent while scrambling for the surrender flag.

But mostly i see it as a tool for RP.

Again 4. in any form either unlimited, timed, or computer controlled. the player(s) will have the options to enter any of the other configurations at any time during the bout as long as all the parties involved agree. As well as giving all the parties a way out. And 5. would give the means to dispute any outcome of an opt out with the text print out.



As far as the rock paper scissor approach, I see nothing wrong with it and with an AP(action point) counter it would allow for stamina to take an active role in each round, rather than waiting for it to drop to zero as is now the case. BUT I would still like a way to for defense to have the means to possibly see(wish proper stats/skills) the upcoming attack.

[pedenel]

If my choices were only to defend high, md or low then yes, I would like to see what's coming.  However, if my choices were to raise my shield & draw my sword or back away from attacker or draw my weapon and wildly lash out, then I would think, not really. After all, if I'm being unexpectedly attacked, the logical reactions can be somewhat limited.

My view is that the more specific the options, the less interesting/enjoyable in a it will be especially in a turn based system.

Again, just my 2 cents.

[emeraldfool]

I really like this idea. I was skeptical, but I realised it would be the perfect solution to the lag issue, like you said. It would also take out the fast-paced, panicky part of combat that often finds people simply spamming their best attack/spell and strafing around in a circle like so many action RPGs that don't give you ample time to think.
Also, for the same reason, it's difficult to RP in the heat of battle, whereas this would help that perfectly, and allow you to RP out every single action within the fight (much like the RP-dice-duels that the more avid RPers employ)


The only thing I can see wrong with this system is the OOC idea of two people standing, staring at each other until one falls down dead. Perhaps if both fighters went into a sort of "duel mode", which is basically the same as normal except their characters are controlled automatically through commands rather than manually, and each command-input is taken alternately between the two characters.

In other words, everything is in real-time, except you have to sit still while your enemy chooses a command. It would make a lot more sense, I think...



As for the actual combat system, I'd leave that to the Devs...

[Unnamed_Source]

The only thing I can see wrong with this system is the OOC idea of two people standing, staring at each other until one falls down dead. Perhaps if both fighters went into a sort of "duel mode", which is basically the same as normal except their characters are controlled automatically through commands rather than manually, and each command-input is taken alternately between the two characters.

In other words, everything is in real-time, except you have to sit still while your enemy chooses a command. It would make a lot more sense, I think...

Actually that's exactly how I am picturing it, I don't know how you originaly percieve the idea but I would like for you to elaborate to I can change the text to reflect this better.

My conception is that the rest of the game can come and go around the parties fighting, only seeing the combating parties move(attack, dodge, parry, ect) after each round. Like the combatants had a major case of lag. Mean while in the combat mode you do just that, wait for all the parties to make their choices and then see the characters move in a stop motion scene, with the freeze starting the next round.

[neko kyouran]

Question: How do you handle 1 vs many type duels?

[pedenel]

I'd guess that e.g. in the midst of a battle between A & B you'd suddenly get a message saying "C has attacked A" and you get an additional participant in the rounds.

However, if you had a general melee going on where A, B and C were fighting and D attacks A, E attacks B, etc, etc I think the sequential turn mode may have problem re-prioritising the whose turns it should be next.

[Unnamed_Source]

You would have to add a sequence roll and determine who attacks first. Anyone entering an ongoing fight would added to the end of the line.

In the sequential combat the attackers go fist then the defenders, if no own is attacking you then you keep attacking in the next round. A defender would have to have the choice of attack or defend. You can simply ignore your defenses and concentrate on attacking. In which case you just rely on your armor to soften the blows since you won't raise your shield or dodge an attack.

With AP, I would say the two would roughly be the same(roll sequence) except you would base your defense on how much AP you have and if you run out you no longer can defend. Too many characters attacking and you can then be overwhelmed and defend to just a few of their attacks. Something to what a hunting party would do to an ulber, overwhelm it, making it run out of AP then land a few easy undefended shots, round after round till its dead.

1)Attack the primary target and that round you are left vulnerable t the 2nd, 3rd, ect attackers.
2)Defend and you would defend against the onslaught, waiting for chance of opportunities counters attacks  embedded i your  defensive moves and with critical failures form your opponents.
3)At the initiation of the round or when attacking you can choose the primary target if more than one is present, choosing between enemies and friends. that way you can use the round to strike at an enemy or heal a friend.

[emeraldfool]

Actually that's exactly how I am picturing it, I don't know how you originaly percieve the idea but I would like for you to elaborate to I can change the text to reflect this better.

My conception is that the rest of the game can come and go around the parties fighting, only seeing the combating parties move(attack, dodge, parry, ect) after each round. Like the combatants had a major case of lag. Mean while in the combat mode you do just that, wait for all the parties to make their choices and then see the characters move in a stop motion scene, with the freeze starting the next round.

Oh, maybe I misread it, but somehow I got the impression you meant everyone involved in the duel would be kind of 'frozen in time', and somehow separated from the rest of the world (time-wise).

Whereas I was thinking more like the dueling system we have now, except there's delays between actions, and all of the fighters are rendered immobile (or maybe they automatically strafe/circle around each other for a more realistic feel) while decisions are being made...
Is that your idea?

[Unnamed_Source]

The second one.  The frozen state is not one of statues till the end but one of gradual clock work motions that show the passers by the battle as it progresses, round by round. From both perspectives you will see player A swing his sword and player B block with his shield then a small pause,  with a Mote or two drung the pause and another action sequence. pause, action, pause.  And during the pauses the parties involved are choosing their defensive/offensive maneuvers and typing out any motes that they may want.

I think the motes would be best placed during the pause as they would be most likely reactions to the last sequence but again I promote choice so have the ability to mote for during the pause and during the next action.(dispaly the mote during the action sequence)

As stated, this would be best seen in Beta-vision, where there are numerous moves. from tumbles to falls to the choice weapon maneuvers. All we have now is standing still, a flinch, and the mining pick thrust, which is not very appealing. But it is something that can be worked on visually later by focusing an just the moves instead of  how the entire combat system would look.