Goblin Squad Member
|
You guys are probably going to see me harp on this quite a bit over the next couple of years, so I might as well get started now. =)
The devs have said that they intend to try and include real formations that players can enter. This is an cool idea that can lead to a much more tactical feeling in combat, particularly PvP combat, and can even improve network performance and enable larger scale battles.
Now, I know that you guys are not stupid, but let me point out some things that are probably already obvious to all of you.
Collision detection is when two models interact in a realistic way so that one cannot pass through the other one, for instance a player walking through a wall, or a monster, or another player. MMO's typically use collision detection in a pretty selective way. A player or monster may not be able to walk through a wall, but they might be able to walk through each other and players are usually able to pass through the same space at the same time, though sometimes not while they are in combat with one another.
The rationale for turning off collision detection usually has to do with preventing NPCs from blocking vital areas or crowded areas from becoming annoying, and also to prevent players from griefing one another by blocking or trapping another character in a small space that they cannot leave.
I am not sure I have a strong opinion about out-of-combat collision detection, but I feel that it should always be turned on while in combat, and--more to the point--formations as a whole should have collision detection (i.e. one formation, friendly or not, should not be able to pass through another, and even individual players, friendly or not, should not be able to pass through a formation), there may be exceptions to this--maybe very open formations should not prevent passage as a total unit (though the individual soldiers in it might depending on the circumstances). So, two open formations might pass through each other with some difficulty, but a closed one probably could not pass through an open one.
Note that we could go into a great deal more detail having to do with opposing forces breaking up one another's formations, etc. but this isn't a hardcore wargame, and maybe that's a conversation for another day.
Next post: enfilade, flanking, and what it means for you.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enfilade_and_defilade
The whole reason formations were important in ancient and medieval warfare has to do with flanking. If you have two big disorganized mobs of people fighting one another, things are going to get pretty chaotic, the mobs are going to blend together,individuals will get flanked on multiple sides, surrounded, cut-off, and there will be a lot of casualties, or else a lot of running away, or both (which pretty accurately describes most large-scale PvP in MMO's). If you are an ancient soldier would you rather be running helter-skelter into a big glob of the enemy, or standing, practically arm-in-arm with guys on either side, and probably a guy behind, all of them carrying pointy metal things and ready to cover your flanks? All of this made possible by the real world property of matter that two things can't occupy the same space at the same time, aka "collision detection".
Enfilade has to do with the various properties of a formation depending on the way it is facing. If you are in a line, and you are perpendicular to your foe, you are going to have a bad time, but if you are parallel to the enemy, they will struggle to hit you all at the same time with a grenade or a fireball spell, etc. If you are locked in a formation and someone flanks you in hand-to-hand combat... well first of all you are facing the wrong way, they can hit you but you can't hit them, and your friends with pointy things might not be in a position to cover your back. If archers are firing at you from the side, your shield is in the wrong place, and even if they miss you maybe they hit the guy next to you, how can they miss? If you are in a tight formation because of limited space, or to bring your force to bear on a concentrated area (see von Clausewitz) and a wizard drops an AoE, it's going to hurt your whole unit more than if you were spread out.
So, my point is, these formations that the devs want to implement don't need to have special in-game properties or rules for them to be important, complicated, and well... tactical, they just have to mirror the real world in certain crucial ways, and then the game play will follow in a very sandbox-y way.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I agree that the best way to implement formation fighting would be to structure the general combat system to inherently favor it rather than having specific formations that 'magically' give bonuses.
In Pathfinder PnP an enemy entering your space is subject to an attack of opportunity. If they implement this concept in PFO with a knockback effect you'd effectively have 'in combat collision detection'.
Likewise, benefits for having allies on either side and/or penalties for being surrounded by enemies would inherently promote formation fighting. Ditto with benefits for firing into multiple rows of enemies... for instance, if the game had a mechanic that even if you missed your primary target with a ranged attack you had a chance to hit any other enemies in a straight line behind them then you'd naturally learn to fire from the flanks.
Something else I suggested on a similar thread was to have the number of attacks a character makes decrease if they move a lot. This would discourage the common video game tactic of bouncing around like crazy and instead encourage people to stand and fight unless there was some vital reason to reposition.
They could build a very strong formation combat system just by making the rules of individual combat favor formations.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Defiantly need collision detection!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My question is how they intend us to hold formation while we maneuver?
I've tried drilling with others (Mechwarrior Online) and the closest we seem able to get is to remain in each others' general vicinity. Column of Twos, or Wheel and Refuse Flank will be a nightmare trying to coordinate, even if Joe from New Jersey is completely willing to try.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My guess is that they will lock you into formation, in other words you will not have to move your character, it will simply move automatically to stay in formation.
One good reason for thinking this is that the devs said in an interview somewhere (sorry, no source) that formations help with network bandwidth by reducing the amount of information that needs to be sent back and forth. The only way that could be true is if you are not sending movement control signals for your character.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In PnP Pathfinder, you can move through allies with no penalty, but have to make an Acrobatics check to be able to move through an enemy. The reason for this is because each square is 5 ft x 5 ft, so the theory is that someone doesnt take up the whole square but instead is moving constantly within that square dodging, gesturing to cast, swinging their sword, etc. In general, I'm for collision detection in online games but I have seen it done badly and when that happens it makes the game unplayable. It might be better to allow moving through people, but still make detection calculations and apply bonuses accordingly. That way, if the calculations are slightly off it doesn't warp people around all over the place and most people probably won't even notice there's an issue. In PnP Pathfinder, if you fail your Acrobatics check to move through an enemy you end up prone, and that can easily be done I think.
There are also shunting rules, which basically means that if you end up inside of a solid object you get warped to a nearby space and take a little bit of damage. This is in core PnP Pathfinder and would be a good solution to certain scenarios and wouldn't even be something they had to make up to make the game work or make sense.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I understand where you are coming from. I have been playing pen and paper games for over 25 years. I like the Pathfinder system, obviously, and I hope that they stick as closely as they can to it wherever it is feasible.
However, Pathfinder, and the AD&D system before it going all the way back to First Edition, and even Chainmail (the proto-D&D) was intended from its conception to handle small scale combat, no more than 6 or 8 players (and all on the same side)--not squad and certainly not platoon scale. It did and does this in a way that is fun, but not particularly realistic. And many of it's basic premises, if not it's mechanics, influenced most of the alternate game systems that came after it. So, when MUDs and later MMOs came along they were also unavoidably influenced by the premises of the pen and paper rpgs around, not to mention being technically restricted by the systems and networks that they operated on.
All of this explains the kind of sad state of large scale PvP combat in modern MMO's. Those MMO's are iterations of the same basic ideas and systems, which at their core were never intended to deal with any such thing as players fighting players, much less at a massive scale. Sure developers tack on refinements and improvements, but they never really address the underlying assumptions that they didn't even make themselves, that they instead inherited from the rpg tradition.
My argument is that their needs to me a more robust, fundamental solution to these problems, and that the Pathfinder system, for all of it's many strengths, is not going to get us where we need to be in the specific area of large scale PvP.
Revcasy, I would suggest you formulate your concerns into the form of a question, make a video asking this question and post it in the video questions thread. They will likely answer it as not too many are asking questions in that format yet. That thread is Here
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The very best part of Collision detection is the tanking role.
Being able to block off enemies as a fighter is one of the most satisfying feelings in pvp.
I prefer a system where there is definite collision detection, but if it's pressed upon for a certain amount of time (Maybe a second or two) you can still find your way through that single enemy.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I was just thinking that if they want to take a more free-form direction, they could instead of/in addition to pre-set formations, have the ability for players to form up in whatever way they want, then the commander or squad leader "locks" them in, and the game automatically maintains them in that formation as they move, etc.
So, in a game with area of effect magic, it becomes a delicate balance between concentrating as many swords as possible on individual targets, versus spreading out so that your whole squad isn't inside the radius of a fireball for example.
A concentrated cube of tanky swordsmen would be great at defining the battlefield and protecting flanks or holding a center, but if the other side has lots of offensive spell casters your swordsmen may be in trouble.
Use wizards to bust open the flank of a large army, then charge in with your own warriors or raging barbarians (highly mobile strike infantry) and hit their rear.
You know what, if GW doesn't make this game, I may have to. =)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One good reason for thinking this is that the devs said in an interview somewhere (sorry, no source) that formations help with network bandwidth by reducing the amount of information that needs to be sent back and forth. The only way that could be true is if you are not sending movement control signals for your character.
I believe it was Mark Kalmes: Link
This immediately got me to thinking of a Total War: Medieval style mass-combat, where the squad leader could take the control of the movement of the squad as a whole and order them into different formations. The formations available, movement speed, time needed to change formations and offensive/defensive bonuses received while in the formation could depend on the skill level of the squad leader (and of course the chosen formation).
Each player could retain the control of their weapon choice, targeting and skill use. To top it off each player could have the possibility to break formation at any time, if they choose to do so.
Fully agree with you rev, someone really needs to make this game.