Author Topic: Combat realism  (Read 4355 times)

Shaman

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 411
    • View Profile
Re: Combat realism
« Reply #15 on: June 24, 2008, 01:10:47 pm »
That's why you train anti-magic when it's implemented. It'll be a test of endurance, how long you can live and how long their mana lasts.

Ulfer

  • Hydlaa Resident
  • *
  • Posts: 51
  • Sovereign, The Bloodstone Brethren
    • View Profile
Re: Combat realism
« Reply #16 on: July 31, 2008, 11:37:34 pm »
Hm, what I didn't take into account was armor crafting and the quality of defense that will bring if/when that gets implemented... though most of my points are still valid.

Argoroth

  • Wayfarer
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Re: Combat realism
« Reply #17 on: August 04, 2008, 03:42:54 am »
Anyone remember Merlin, or gandalf, or Raislin for that matter.

For every Merlin and Gandalf, there are Conan and Robin. And for every Raistlin there is Caramon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raistlin_Majere

Quote
He is also condescending, extremely resents his lack of physical strength and often relies on his twin brother for support. This generates feelings of resentment and jealousy more than feelings of affection and gratitude. To be exact, Raistlin harbors a secret hate for his twin’s physical power, and for the attention and comradeship it seems to earn him, which Raistlin’s own appearance and secretive nature denies him. Also of note, in SoulForge Raistlin develops a short-lived affection for a local town girl. He, already envious of his brothers popularity, stumbles upon his brother having sexual relations with the woman to whom his affections had been directed.

Powerful mages are supposed to be able to turn any onery dwarf into a crispy critter in moments.

Powerful warriors are supposed to be able to crack the same dwarf's skull or a squishy mage's skull and resist or reflect a hostile spell back to its source in moments.

SO, a fighter can kill one in a single second, maybe 2, and what, a mage can't be allowed to do the same, in twice the time?

Your mage = squishy/dead, while a fighter you're facing is not.

A spell-eater/spell-reflector gear that hurls the spells back at the source and kills it "in a single second, maybe 2" or "in twice the time" -- 'nuff said.

Factor in the cost of becoming said 'uber' mage, theres only like about 15 players that high imo.  Could be wrong, there could be more.  As for the ways being similar, lol, not even close, Brown Way's flying stones is about 4 times as strong as max DW Taste of Death, while CW is twice as stong at least as DW.  While it is all imblalanced, i don't see how reducing it's effectiveness would make it a better experience for PS players, since many wish to be mages

And many do not...

and well, what you sujest seems to give the advantage to fighters, which, sorry to say, just swing bits of metal at a beast, while being a mage takes true studies

Just swinging bits of wood at a beast instead takes "true studies", indeed...

I think actually doubling the max value for magic would make it more balanced, make it take much longer to gain high ranks, since a mage, basically studies his whole life if he/she's anything serious about it, while making the combat skills slightly faster in gain, since it's pretty much all practice, with theory reserved for tactics mostly.

Waving a wand in the air is a serious business...

I personally don't care, since my in-game character can battle in many different ways. However, this poster's "logic" was so laughable that I wanted to give him a taste of his own "medicine". ;D
« Last Edit: August 04, 2008, 04:20:53 am by Argoroth »

Duraza

  • Hydlaa Notable
  • *
  • Posts: 761
    • View Profile
    • Want to know the truth now?
Re: Combat realism
« Reply #18 on: August 04, 2008, 02:09:54 pm »
I personally don't care, since my in-game character can battle in many different ways. However, this poster's "logic" was so laughable that I wanted to give him a taste of his own "medicine". ;D

And using his exact logic in reverse is proving a point? :P

He presents reasons why mages can beat warriors without giving any bonus to the warriors and you do the same only reversed. Point is, magic and blade should be even and completely equal. Possibly it takes more cash to learn magic and more training to learn swords (as it is now cause swords have a shorter yellow bar). However their strengths at certain levels should be equal just to keep things fair. So if your battling a level 100 brown way mage and your level 100 in sword either one of you can win. In the end it should come down to superior thinking and strategy to win a match. Actual tatics. Not 'My swords faster and stronger than yours' or 'my glyphs are ultra rare an yours aren't'.
Saggi Lezeheso, The Whisper's Jest
Demoik and Rioqura, The Immortal Harrow
Vertum, Will of Dakkru

Duraza Darkom, Slayer of Kittens

khoridor

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 352
    • View Profile
Re: Combat realism
« Reply #19 on: October 07, 2008, 05:26:51 am »
I thought it would be easy to balance all that, once the requirements are clear.
To me, requirements would be:
- fighters of similar levels would need many blows or spells to kill each other (otherwise there's no show to watch)
- magic looses precision and damage with distance.
- The mage still has the advantage of weakening his opponent before (and if) he comes to contact.
- Mages can walk while casting, but not run (not without tripping, or at least serious chances of failing the casting)
- Weapons quickly slice a mage who doesn't use protective spells.
- Magic projectiles are stopped by walls, rocks, or whatever the target is hiding behind.
- Physical armor does protect from ranged spells, one way or another.
- The most damaging spells go straightforward and can be dodged. More subtle magic can actually chase the target.
- Mages definitely are disadvantaged in close-combat. Their point is to keep the enemy at a distance. But that should not be accomplished by running.
- Mages keep their main advantage: zone spells. An arch-mage can incapacitate an army of nobodies, only to worry about some survivors of higher calibre.
- Mages also keep the advantage of a larger arsenal: they can blind, paralyse, cage, mind control, etc.

There is more, of course.
If balancing is achieved now, one side will probably still have an advantage for a while, until everything is in place (ranged weapons, magic items, etc.).
In the end, I think powerful mages should have it easy in open space, and clearly harder a time in a small room.

Btw, a claymore is not a 2-handed weapon. It works fine with a shield. But 2 long weapons only work together in fantasy settings. So there are decisions to be made there.
Also, a dwarf may look odd with a claymore, but all races can currently use the same weapons in the same ways, and wear the same clothes and armor, regardless of their size. So this is not a claymore issue. So far, dwarves wear dwarven boots, so they swing dwarven claymores. Rob Roy / Liam Neeson is not the height reference of yliakum.

Hrothbert

  • Hydlaa Resident
  • *
  • Posts: 141
    • View Profile
Re: Combat realism
« Reply #20 on: January 31, 2009, 11:24:17 pm »
I disagree about a claymore not being a two-handed weapon<re. last post> Not because fo design or ability but sure strength, Most of all races should only be able to wield a claymore at max strength [current 200] but only there, I see Kran capapble of weilding two because of their size and the fact that they currently make Short swrods look like Daggers and long swords look like sorts [also their physical structure being made of a crystaline substance would lend to a much strong wielding arm], Been thinking of this for awhile and not sure how hard to implement it would be but to set a 'you cannot wield this because you are using a claymore' when trying to equip a shield or second weapon, or to put a strength limit on them like Armours currently have as well as named special weapons.

I agree wholely with Ulfer on the humorous look of Dwarves carrying claymores, it also stand that we should not be able to carry as many weapons as we do, Being that most blades are made of more than on steel stock, the weight of the weapons is a little low but not suggesting that be changed just that wielding 2 claymores/longswords seems a bit much, longsword and a knife or dagger seems reasonable. Just thinking about physical abilities of the actual races and the 1.5 meter claymores and 1 meter lonswords.

Well just sharing thoughts thanks for reading.