I've read all of the blog posts and I've looked around the forums a bit, but I don't see any confirmation on a few things (which is to be expected of course, the game is early in development). In particular are mechanics behind targeting, projectiles, hit detection, and the practical uses of movement in combat.
(I should clarify, by hit detection I mean any method of determining hits that isn't based solely on having a target. AoEs are an example.)
As far as I understand, the targeting system in an MMO is mostly dependent on the functionality of projectiles and the existence of hit detection (besides AoE). Most MMOs don't use actual projectiles. Instead, they treat a ranged attack as an immediate effect with an animation to make it look like a projectile. Some games utilize actual projectile and hit detection mechanics. Some games have certain non-projectile attacks (touch/melee) using hit detection as well. Most games treat a touch/melee attack the same way as a ranged attack without projectile functionality or hit detection, the only difference being animation and range.
Having hit detection also creates the possibility of avoiding attacks via movement. This means almost all melee attacks will have cast times associated with the animations (instead of being instant), thus allowing players to step out of the attack range/arc. It also means projectiles would likely be coded as more than animations and have actual hitboxes (unless another method can be used) and flight times.
Here are three example combat systems I've seen in MMOs:
1.) World of Warcraft (traditional MMO)
Here you don't usually deal with hit detection or actual projectiles. Thus, abilities require a target and tab targeting is the dominant method of combat. At the activation of the ability, after the cast time, the calculations are automatically made.
2.) Guild Wars 2
Here you use a combination of hit detection, projectiles, tab targeting, and movement. Projectiles generally go in either the direction of your camera, to the nearest enemy in sight, or towards your target. Projectiles generally have flight times and hit detection; some having honing aspects. Melee attacks function similarly, however you never require a target. You activate your attack, and the game checks during a certain part of the animation to see if any enemies are within range. Some attacks hit an individual enemy while some cleave.
For ranged combat you'll require a target to be effective; for melee attacks you don't require one but having one allows you to be more accurate. Almost every attack can be used with a target or without one.
Obviously this allows for a lot of damage avoidance through movement, whether avoiding a projectile or barely dodging a melee attack. Certain attacks are essentially unavoidable by design though.
From what I understand, ESO is similar to Guild Wars 2 overall except you have the addition of a crosshair on screen to accurately fire projectiles without having a target.
3.) TERA
It is essentially the same as a traditional MMO like World of Warcraft except instead of tab targeting you use your crosshair to look at them. While you are looking at them they function identical to being tab targeted.
You apparently can't avoid attacks simply by moving (only with certain abilities), so hit detection and projectiles aren't a very utilized feature. This is just a modified version of the traditional MMO combat.
--------------
Personally, I believe the Guild Wars 2's combat philosophy is the most superior model (thus far) for a few simple reasons. First, as someone who has played Guild Wars 2 for over a thousand hours, it is simply the most engaging combat I've experienced in an MMO. Even though it is a themepark which gets boring quickly, the combat is what kept me engaged until I stopped playing.
In MMO combat there's really two ways you seem to interact with allies and enemies. Either through managing your abilities, resources, cooldowns, and effects, or through movement and positioning.
World of Warcraft represents the bare minimum of the latter although they've progressively tried to ramp up how much mobility and positioning mean in certain encounters through the use of AoE.
TERA attempts to mold the World of Warcraft combat model into something more engaging and action oriented, but it simply creates the illusion that the fundamental combat is different with the implementation of the crosshair instead of tab targeting (don't get me wrong, it does feel different and is more engaging, but at the end of the day it is the same old dish you've eaten for the last 10 years).
The Elder Scrolls Online and Guild Wars 2 take both designs, the micromanagement and movement/positioning, and attempt to utilize both. Micromanagement of abilities and resources is prevalent with the same kinds of interactions between abilities like you would expect in an MMO, but with the addition of the ability to affect the battle equally through movement.
Going off of Guild Wars 2, you can avoid almost every single attack (you don't always because of cooldowns, CC, etc., and your enemies not being stupid of course). Projectiles can be dodged, AoEs can be anticipated and avoided, melee attacks can be sidestepped. The game supplements this with a dodge mechanic along with many movement oriented abilities.
People may disagree with me, but I believe such systems are vastly superior than the standard style of playing a numbers game, where you focus almost entirely on your UI and micromanagement to the exclusion of all else.
Melee combat between two parties in a traditional MMO isn't played in a way that a tabletop RPG makes you imagine. It's not how heroes fight in stories and it's not how we like to imagine our characters.
Generally you walk up to each other and start your rotations, watch our for abilities you want to interrupt, managine your buffs and debuffs, and the person with the best gear or build wins. Some people like to circle strafe or jump to try to mess you up, but against competent players there's not much of a point in moving at all.
In an action MMO, and in a game like Guild Wars 2, you don't stand still doing nothing. You're actively engaging in avoiding/blocking attacks and trying to force enemies into taking your best attacks. You don't utilize buffs and debuffs as consistent effects (generally, there are common exceptions depending on builds which is fine) instead you use them situationally based on how the fight is going and your positioning relative to your enemies. The skill cap is raised, the variety of fights drastically increased, and you're always engaged in what's happening.
That all being said, I'm not suggesting GW copies Guild Wars 2. I'm suggesting they consider how Pathfinder Online's combat will define itself, and not limit themselves to what a traditional themepark has done. Thus far, based on the information I've gathered, they haven't limited themselves, and some aspects that I've been discussing seem to be accepted ideals. I believe that Pathfinder Online has the ability to blow all the other competition out of the water in terms of combat, and I want this game to surpass Guild Wars 2 and Elder Scrolls Online.
However, I understand the complexity of what I'm asking they consider.
Coding something like TERA or World of Warcraft is much easier from a design perspective, and less taxing from a server perspective. It's much easier to code for automatic hit detection based on tab targeting instead of applying a hitbox to projectiles and adding in additional checks for melee/touch attacks. It's also much easier to balance abilities based solely on their interactions with each other, rather than the mechanical implications that stem from mobility.
However, I also understand that this stage in development is the only point at which GW can make this decision unless they intend to scrap the combat system entirely later down the line.
I could be babbling over nothing and they could have already clarified everything I'm discussing, so if that's a case I would appreciate some clarification. I already know they intend for abilities to generally be on the move, for example, with the main downside being Opportunity or opportunity cost for using other abilities with the Stationary requirement.
If they haven't entirely decided on these aspects of combat, then I'd like to elaborate on why I believe this combat is superior (besides just being more fun and engaging for me personally) and how I've envisioned this type of system merging with the aspects they've already discussed for Pathfinder Online.
Sorry about the wall. I tried to break it up into manageable pieces, but I also didn't want to compromise what I was trying to express.
Goblin Squad Member
|
There have been a few people who lobbied for a TERA-style targeting and hit-detection system. That doesn't seem likely.
Essentially, it will be tab targeting, and your chance to hit will be a function of the various things that affect your Attack versus the various things that affect your target's Defense.
We are looking at... tab targeting being the primary targeting method...
I would recommend a re-read of Murder by Numbers to get a better handle on how they're planning to resolve Attacks.
There have been a few people who lobbied for a TERA-style targeting and hit-detection system. That doesn't seem likely.
Essentially, it will be tab targeting, and your chance to hit will be a function of the various things that affect your Attack versus the various things that affect your target's Defense.
We are looking at... tab targeting being the primary targeting method...I would recommend a re-read of Murder by Numbers to get a better handle on how they're planning to resolve Attacks.
A Tab Targeting system can work with what I'm talking about. In fact, the entire system of damage determination could remain the same. That blog only outlines what happens once an attack is confirmed, not the way it is confirmed, which is what I'm concerned about.
Speaking of TERA, that is simply a red herring that is a further limitation on the already limited traditional MMO combat rather than an addition. Instead of tab targeting, you have to look at them. That's the only difference between the two systems, which is likely why GW wouldn't utilize it.
Thanks for giving me information though, since that is what I asked for.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No twitch-based combat, please.
Nothing against you, but that's a bit of a straw man since that's not what I'm advocating. It's probably just my fault for not being concise.
Define twitch based? If you mean how an FPS is played, then that's not what I'm talking about.
I'm talking about being able to avoid enemy attacks by movement, and having movement as a primary way to engage in combat.
Conceptually its the same as the micromanagement aspect of combat. You see someone using an ability that is strong so you activate a defensive ability or you use an interrupt. You try to refresh your buffs or keep a certain debuff on the enemy. You activate buffs to your damage before you use a strong hit. Things like that.
In the tabletop game, you usually try to use positioning and movement when possible. In most engaging combat systems the same principle is applied.
If an enemy charges up an attack, you don't simply stand there and accept your fate; you activate a block and prepare to counterattack or you get out of the way.
Imagine a tab targeting system, but you can do MORE than just activate abilities to react to opponents. That's what I'm talking about.
GW2 is fairly twitchy. You must use a decent amount of player skill that is completely divorced from your character in order to do all the dodging of major attacks.
Not much more than the micromanagement aspect of combat requires though. If you disagree with that, I'd be happy to discuss it with you.
From my point of view, this is a system that simply has a higher skill cap and allows players to do more than they could simply by hitting abilities. But the skill required to do those things is the same skill that is required to effectively respond to your opponent by hitting interrupts and CC, etc.
I've played some fair amount of GW2 (Warrior at level 80). The dodging aspect is very difficult for me at times.
What makes dodging more difficult than say, for example, activating an interrupt before an attack hits you, or using a knockback on an enemy with a temporary offensive buff, or utilizing a self-healing skill at the right time?
They seem to be the same concept. They both require management of cooldowns and resources, along with opportunity cost factors. Both are based on reacting to the enemy in a certain amount of time.
One suggestion I'd like to mention: 5 Foot Step
From the Pathfinder Tabletop Rules:
"You can move 5 feet in any round when you don't perform any other kind of movement. Taking this 5-foot step never provokes an attack of opportunity. You can't take more than one 5-foot step in a round, and you can't take a 5-foot step in the same round that you move any distance.
You can take a 5-foot step before, during, or after your other actions in the round.
You can only take a 5-foot-step if your movement isn't hampered by difficult terrain or darkness. Any creature with a speed of 5 feet or less can't take a 5-foot step, since moving even 5 feet requires a move action for such a slow creature.
You may not take a 5-foot step using a form of movement for which you do not have a listed speed."
It seems like a perfect tool to utilize mobility that is already ingrained into the Pathfinder experience.
I suggest allowing a single 5 foot step during every 6 seconds of combat. The 5 foot step would move your character a set distance to the left/right or backward. It would consume stamina and momentarily prevent movement after the step.
The benefits are obvious. It allows you to avoid one attack or quickly move out of an AoE once per 6 seconds if you choose to do so. It could be used for other positional purposes such as coordinating with an ally to avoid their AoE (while the enemy remains) or flanking.
There are a couple of downsides, however. First, it uses up precious stamina. It also takes up time during that 6 seconds, and potentially positions you to where you can't hit your enemy. This means there is a compromise between offense and defense. Potentially it would also inhibit further movement during that 6 seconds with a debuff similar to how movement is restricted in the tabletop game after using a five foot step.
In combat, this would be a valuable tool to be used sparingly. It decreases your potential actions per round while potentially avoiding a powerful attack. It would possibly prevent quick movement after its use, leaving you vulnerable for the remainder of the 6 seconds.
It would create a mind game between both combatants. If you choose to use your 5 foot step at the end of each 6 seconds, then the other player will anticipate this and take advantage. Your opponent could potentially force you to waste your 5 foot step, then hit you with their real strong attack. Your opponent could push you hard to force you to use your 5 foot step, then take that opportunity to back up themselves and switch to ranged combat. Etc.
Edit: Also, it would be a good way to deal with Fighters or other melee combatants since you would generally have few ways to counter them without causing Opportunity. If you're another melee character you would otherwise just be standing there unless you want to risk Opportunity by moving just to trigger Opportunity on the enemy. Which is an interesting tactic, but so it using a 5 foot step to force your enemy to risk Opportunity.
I find all of those to be pretty difficult in GW2. I would like those very time-sensitive actions to not be necessary in PFO.
Personally, I would find a game without such interactions between you and your opponent to be both very shallow and build/gear dependent rather than relying on quick-thinking and skill.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That blog only outlines what happens once an attack is confirmed, not the way it is confirmed, which is what I'm concerned about.
1. The system rolls 3d200 (three random numbers ranging from 1-200) for the attacker.
2. Depending on the Tier of the weapon, the player takes the lowest, middle, or highest result of the three rolls.
3. The attacker's total attack bonus is added to the result of the roll.
4. This result is compared to the target's total defense.
5. If the result of the roll plus the attack bonus equaled or exceeded the target's defense, the attack does full damage and has a chance to be a critical hit.
That is how an attack is confirmed. There are more details at the blog I linked.
That blog only outlines what happens once an attack is confirmed, not the way it is confirmed, which is what I'm concerned about.That is how an attack is confirmed. There are more details at the blog I linked.
1. The system rolls 3d200 (three random numbers ranging from 1-200) for the attacker.
2. Depending on the Tier of the weapon, the player takes the lowest, middle, or highest result of the three rolls.
3. The attacker's total attack bonus is added to the result of the roll.
4. This result is compared to the target's total defense.
5. If the result of the roll plus the attack bonus equaled or exceeded the target's defense, the attack does full damage and has a chance to be a critical hit.
That is how damage is calculated though. The attack is already confirmed before this point. (I did read the blog though).
By confirmed I mean:
"Will this spell reach the enemy or will I miss/is he out of range?"
"Will this greatsword swing reach the enemy or is he out of range?"
I should be more specific with my word choice. Basically, the math above already assumes that your target has been targeted, is in the proper range, and the attack has made contact with your enemy. So at that point it is just calculating damage.
One suggestion I'd like to mention: 5 Foot Step
From the Pathfinder Tabletop Rules:
"You can move 5 feet in any round when you don't perform any other kind of movement. Taking this 5-foot step never provokes an attack of opportunity. You can't take more than one 5-foot step in a round, and you can't take a 5-foot step in the same round that you move any distance.
You can take a 5-foot step before, during, or after your other actions in the round.
You can only take a 5-foot-step if your movement isn't hampered by difficult terrain or darkness. Any creature with a speed of 5 feet or less can't take a 5-foot step, since moving even 5 feet requires a move action for such a slow creature.
You may not take a 5-foot step using a form of movement for which you do not have a listed speed."
It seems like a perfect tool to utilize mobility that is already ingrained into the Pathfinder experience.
I suggest allowing a single 5 foot step during every 6 seconds of combat. The 5 foot step would move your character a set distance to the left/right or backward. It would consume stamina and momentarily prevent movement after the step.
The benefits are obvious. It allows you to avoid one attack or quickly move out of an AoE once per 6 seconds if you choose to do so. It could be used for other positional purposes such as coordinating with an ally to avoid their AoE (while the enemy remains) or flanking.
There are a couple of downsides, however. First, it uses up precious stamina. It also takes up time during that 6 seconds, and potentially positions you to where you can't hit your enemy. This means there is a compromise between offense and defense. Potentially it would also inhibit further movement during that 6 seconds with a debuff similar to how movement is restricted in the tabletop game after using a five foot step.
In combat, this would be a valuable tool to be used sparingly. It decreases your potential actions per round while potentially avoiding a powerful attack. It would possibly...
Building on this, it could also create an interesting group dynamic with Flanking.
Flanking could simply be a mechanic where, similar to the tabletop, if you and an ally create a line through the enemy you get a bonus (however this would be applied is arbitrary for this discussion).
It would be interesting to see groups repeatedly risk Opportunity for positioning, while some groups would take it slow and use 5 foot steps to gradually surround an enemy. Doing so would, of course, lower potential damage output and be susceptible to knockbacks/leaps by the enemy in question, causing your whole strategy to revert to square one.
Even so, it adds depth to combat that requires teamwork and rewards skilled play, just like the tabletop. Sounds like a lot of fun too.
Any comments on the two ideas? These are the kinds of mechanics I'm referring to in my original post.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
No twitch-based combat, please.
I have to disagree with this. I understand alot of people do not want this, but I agree with Alarox, some twitch is nessesary. If there is no twitch style combat, then it just depends on gear and training. This is boring, having combat depend on a rock paper scissors style. We need the ability to dodge. Even if its manually moving out of the way, or an actual activated "dodge" ability.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If there is no twitch style combat, then it just depends on gear and training.
No. It just means that player decisions matter more than player twitch-skills.
Regardless, though:
I think there's a huge design space to be explored. We just won't be exploring the one where you aim with player skill and twitch in response to stimuli.
By confirmed I mean:
"Will this spell reach the enemy or will I miss/is he out of range?"
"Will this greatsword swing reach the enemy or is he out of range?"So, you're talking about the range check?
I thought you were talking about the general "did this attack hit".
I'm talking about the check to see if an attack hits, which could be range, but it could also be other things.
The primary check of an MMO is:
1.) Is your enemy targeted?
2.) Is your enemy within range?
I was asking if we might see something where the check may NOT include "is your enemy targeted".
Like I said above, most MMOs use the target as the check to see if something hits. Some games, notably Guild Wars 2, don't use the target as a check for all abilities (some).
Instead the check is "did the projectile reach the enemy".
In this case you still use targeting, but instead the targeting just guides the projectile to the target and isn't the check itself.
Likewise, melee wouldn't involve targeting as a check either. Instead you would use the attack, then the game would check to see if anyone is in the range and arc of the attack.
That's what I meant when I said this:
There have been a few people who lobbied for a TERA-style targeting and hit-detection system. That doesn't seem likely.
Essentially, it will be tab targeting, and your chance to hit will be a function of the various things that affect your Attack versus the various things that affect your target's Defense.
We are looking at... tab targeting being the primary targeting method...I would recommend a re-read of Murder by Numbers to get a better handle on how they're planning to resolve Attacks.A Tab Targeting system can work with what I'm talking about. In fact, the entire system of damage determination could remain the same. That blog only outlines what happens once an attack is confirmed, not the way it is confirmed, which is what I'm concerned about.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a fan of the GW2 style. It's twitchy but it's a "slow twitch" and discourages constant circle strafe.
An improvement on that system could be the mixture of 5 Foot Step and Flanking. Tell me what you think of those suggestions.
It would essentially be a gradual battle of positioning with, what you could call, a slow twitch where you take advantage of the situation. That plus the other movement skills they plan to implement.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
An improvement on that system could be the mixture of 5 Foot Step and Flanking. Tell me what you think of those suggestions.
Absolutely. It's not hard to think up the tweaks that system would need to be Pathfinder. Attacks of opportunity, 5 ft step would work very well with that system because the over arching theory ios the same as tabel top hex combat: You threaten/attack areas not just individual targets.
I wonder if there will be enough abilities and few enough "slots" that there will be quite a lot of strategy involved? Not just what you train and gear, but what fits on your hotbar for what situation.
Quite a bit more complicated, possibly, than rock-paper-scissors.
Based on an early blog post, here are your abilities:
1-6 is based on your weapon, but you can swap these skills out between combat.
7-10 are refresh skills. Imagine stronger abilities you can only use once per combat generally (and must use a refresh usually out of combat) that are either powerful skills or equip a new set of skills over 1-6.
f1-f2 are utility skills. Less combat oriented abilities that are useful depending on the situation.
f3-f4 are consumable slots. Standard potions/scrolls/etc.
Apparently you then have 6 passive ability slots that are either buffs or abilities that automatically trigger in specific situations.
You can also swap between 2-3 weapon sets, probably 2 sets until you get high enough level to swap between 3.
So, for example, a high level Wizard might have access to 6+6+6+6+6+2 abilities. 6+6+6 for 3 weapon sets, and 6+6 because of two spell books in the refresh slot. However, the spell book abilities would be one use, then you need to use a refresh out of combat.
So you're looking at 12-18 repeatedly usable abilities, with 2 utilities, and 3 one-use abilities that sometimes give you temporary access to more abilities over 1-6 depending on your class, along with 6 passives and 2 items.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Alarox - Fascinating topic. I'm a bit rusty on this (hehe).
One of the key take-homes discussed was effectively: Your character will generally always achieve a "hit" if a type of attack is possible ie a your Elven Bow does have a range as does your sword swipe - proximity. But the hit damage is modified eg if you have high dodge (maybe that is not a good particular eg that I've misapplied) and or by armour and so on. There must be a couple of rationales going by memory:
1. Idea is that you always have some efficacy in combat whoever you fight.
2. The approximation of "to hit" sublimated into small, some more, lots of damage probably helps keep combat more simple to simulate; especially as it's only going to mushroom in numbers and more.
If the combat does categorise such "to hit" categories eg:
1. Long range vs short
2. Dodge ability
3. Cover type
4. Facing eg roll and back-stab
Ie anything that allows a player to decide on their level or know their level of exposure, I think that could work very well even if any of those translate to lower or higher damage as a first course of attack.
As said hazy on this so forgive any glaring errors and mistakes!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In my opinion, a 'dodge move' could be trained and equipped as a slotted feat. Cool if rogues do that on occasion but having everyone dodging right and left... I wouldn't like that very much.
I would expect some feat combinations, i.e. builds, will be more mobile and have more to benefit from supreme command technique of your input devices than others. Not the builds I would likely choose for myself but to each his own, eh?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't mind if this is not a "Twitch" game, but I do want there to be an ability like "dodge" for us lighter armored and more mobile characters. And I want every skill you use to have a pro and con, and you have to weight that choice before you do it, all in the middle of combat. I don't want pvp to be easy, where each person stands there, beating each other and it turn out to be rock paper scissors, or gear/build based wins.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How would these concepts apply to formation fighting or mass archery?
Does player need to direct the character action for supported defense or focused attack? How do targets in 25' x 25' (possibly 25) massed characters dodge 100 incoming arrows, esp. indirect fire?
When does one to one combat fade to lines of 10 or 50?
OK, those not trained to war are just two mobbed rows with no coordination, but when a team is trained, how does the pllayer treat this and how does the 'engine' treat it?
Some concepts that support this are in "Swords Path to Glory" from face-to-face play in the `80's.
Lam
|
Goblinworks Game Designer
|
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Right toward the end of an attack animation, before the system actually makes the attack rolls, it checks to see if the target is still in range and otherwise valid. If you've managed to get out of range between when the attack started and when it ended, it should fail.
Practically, this type of avoidance should only matter for slow attacks; fast ones will likely be into their hit calculations before you can get out of range, unless you were already pulling away from your opponent as he was initiating the attack. But if you see a guy winding up his greatsword, you can absolutely get out of melee range and cause the attack to fail.
Most attacks won't root you during the animation, so attackers will likely follow you if you just try to walk away (and moving tends to give you the Opportunity condition that a lot of guys with greatswords just love you to have).
To deal with the Opportunity situation, you can move cautiously, which is similar to a five-foot step. It sets your movement rate to a walking speed instead of a hustle. You'll move really slowly, and probably won't get away from an attacker that has it in for you unless you have an ally running interference, but you don't get Opportunity. If there's a Fighter in your face, and you really want to try to disengage or lure him to a better position, it's probably a good idea. It does not cost Stamina; the cost is the slow movement. Moving cautiously is a movement toggle, the counterpart to sprinting, that anyone can use by pressing Shift.
Several attack, Refresh, and Utility feats feature Evade effects (especially common on feats designed for Rogues and Monks). These quickly move you backwards, similar to active dodges in other games. More powerful ones move you further away, faster. They tend to get you out of melee (or AoE) range faster than you could hustle, especially backwards, and don't tend to cause Opportunity. They do have an activation time and a Stamina cost (and only so many uses per Refresh, for ones on Refresh feats). If you don't start them quickly enough, an attack could still land while you're mid-Evade, or an attacker willing to hustle after you might get back into melee range before the attack checks for completion. But if you time your Evade correctly, you could escape a big attack much more easily than trying to run away.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So you can move cautiously, hustle or sprint in combat. Sounds good. Are a characters actions somehow limited while sprinting?
I hope those evade effects include backflip animations. :)
I really hope backflips are limited to acrobatic trained rogues and monks. I would hate to see someone in full plate doing backflips.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Right toward the end of an attack animation, before the system actually makes the attack rolls, it checks to see if the target is still in range and otherwise valid. If you've managed to get out of range between when the attack started and when it ended, it should fail.
Practically, this type of avoidance should only matter for slow attacks; fast ones will likely be into their hit calculations before you can get out of range, unless you were already pulling away from your opponent as he was initiating the attack. But if you see a guy winding up his greatsword, you can absolutely get out of melee range and cause the attack to fail.
Most attacks won't root you during the animation, so attackers will likely follow you if you just try to walk away (and moving tends to give you the Opportunity condition that a lot of guys with greatswords just love you to have).
To deal with the Opportunity situation, you can move cautiously, which is similar to a five-foot step. It sets your movement rate to a walking speed instead of a hustle. You'll move really slowly, and probably won't get away from an attacker that has it in for you unless you have an ally running interference, but you don't get Opportunity. If there's a Fighter in your face, and you really want to try to disengage or lure him to a better position, it's probably a good idea. It does not cost Stamina; the cost is the slow movement. Moving cautiously is a movement toggle, the counterpart to sprinting, that anyone can use by pressing Shift.
Several attack, Refresh, and Utility feats feature Evade effects (especially common on feats designed for Rogues and Monks). These quickly move you backwards, similar to active dodges in other games. More powerful ones move you further away, faster. They tend to get you out of melee (or AoE) range faster than you could hustle, especially backwards, and don't tend to cause Opportunity. They do have an activation time and a Stamina cost (and only so many uses per Refresh, for ones on Refresh feats). If you don't...
Wow this sounds really really good. Once again exactly what I wanted. Very strategic with "slow twitch" mixed in.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Right toward the end of an attack animation, before the system actually makes the attack rolls, it checks to see if the target is still in range and otherwise valid. If you've managed to get out of range between when the attack started and when it ended, it should fail.
This alone tells me you guys have your heads in the right place. Thank you for the clarification.
Folks, this is what is going to achieve that happy middle ground between twitch combat and boring combat. Skill based combat is not and should not be solely associated with the ability to react at blazing speeds. It's a finely tuned blend of making the appropriate choice (cognitive) at the appropriate time (physical) .. there's almost never only one right answer.
The devs have clearly stated they're not interested in a combat that consists solely of race conditions, with this further confirmation from Stephen most of us can look forward to the combat demo they were talking about towards the end of the year/early next.
FWIW, my all time favorite combat system is Dark Souls. If you're not used to it, it can seem twitchy, in reality it is very deliberate, excepting the parry mechanic, and even then when the attack us coming from a lumbering greatsword it's much easier to anticipate.
What I'm reading suggests an even slower version of this style of combat.
Deliberate actions with weight, if you move the wrong way, anticipate an action incorrectly, you will be punished by the attacker. If you read the situation correctly and answer with an appropriate action then chances are you will be punishing your opponent for succumbing to your accurate read of the situation. Unless they accurately read your read, and so on. In the course of one round and the time elapsed since the last round all of this is resolved. Physically this may only demand you activate one ability, within about a half second window. It may mean you moved and activated an ability within a slightly greater window.
Sit there and verbalize the time it takes you to say "one one-thousand". A full second is HUGE in terms of pushing a button. Add into this that you should never actually be sitting there waiting for an attack animation to begin before dodging, that kind of system would be phenomenally twitchy and very unsatisfying.
You should be anticipating what they are going to do next and act accordingly. Chances are you're not going to be good at this right away, it takes time to learn which actions lead to which reactions in the next round, and the best ways to deal with each.
If you're not good at this kind of combat, there are other options that can play to your strengths or at least minimize your weak spots. Become a juggernaut that can take the damage, play at ranged where you have more time to run a muscle memorized sequence on a foe before they can close with you. Play a mage that is capable of great destruction in a short period of time.
Basically play whatever you end up playing in a fashion that does not rely on fast critical thinking to do damage. Gods know we'll have enough choices to make our characters in the way we see fit.
TL;DR
Winning.
Right toward the end of an attack animation, before the system actually makes the attack rolls, it checks to see if the target is still in range and otherwise valid. If you've managed to get out of range between when the attack started and when it ended, it should fail.
Practically, this type of avoidance should only matter for slow attacks; fast ones will likely be into their hit calculations before you can get out of range, unless you were already pulling away from your opponent as he was initiating the attack. But if you see a guy winding up his greatsword, you can absolutely get out of melee range and cause the attack to fail.
Most attacks won't root you during the animation, so attackers will likely follow you if you just try to walk away (and moving tends to give you the Opportunity condition that a lot of guys with greatswords just love you to have).
To deal with the Opportunity situation, you can move cautiously, which is similar to a five-foot step. It sets your movement rate to a walking speed instead of a hustle. You'll move really slowly, and probably won't get away from an attacker that has it in for you unless you have an ally running interference, but you don't get Opportunity. If there's a Fighter in your face, and you really want to try to disengage or lure him to a better position, it's probably a good idea. It does not cost Stamina; the cost is the slow movement. Moving cautiously is a movement toggle, the counterpart to sprinting, that anyone can use by pressing Shift.
Several attack, Refresh, and Utility feats feature Evade effects (especially common on feats designed for Rogues and Monks). These quickly move you backwards, similar to active dodges in other games. More powerful ones move you further away, faster. They tend to get you out of melee (or AoE) range faster than you could hustle, especially backwards, and don't tend to cause Opportunity. They do have an activation time and a Stamina cost (and only so many uses per Refresh, for ones on Refresh feats). If you don't...
Thank you for the clarification. This are just the type of systems I was hoping would be included.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think a great example of what could happen in the scenario of a plate-armored combatant attempting to roll is demonstrated soundly in this Dark Souls video.
He gets into some technical details such as invulnerability frames, which don't really add anything to this discussion. But watching the change of rolling behavior between light and heavy armor, it is very disparate. In Dark Souls this is ENTIRELY due to the weight of items you have equipped, which is why you can see him having no issue flipping around with a shield equipped, nevertheless it is a good demonstration of combat mobility.
It sounds like we're going to be looking at something dialed back a pace or two, but there was mention of improperly timed dodges which leads me to believe that this kind of example is applicable.