combat is about to be overhauled - heavily.
this will change everything...
from altering how our level-ups effect the game,
and new options for combat...
(like aggressive & passive stances!) [yes, possibly a new button]
or, using Samuel's old idea... a slide bar for "how aggressive you are as you walk"
(he's ALREADY coded it - over a year ago)
take Oskar's Poll & help the community determine what we work on next!
we did the same with the last update.
asking the community what should be worked on next...
and the concepts that received the most votes were updated, modified & added / removed.
we have even been considering ranged attacks, again...
and this time we have ideas on how it could fit into the game.
yeah, arrows or magic...
who knows?
have some faith & patience.
we are few & the demands are many.
we do what we can, when we can, as much as we can.
Sarumar wrote:hmm.. im not intrested DPR... IMO it is all about can you kill (or not) monsters (and how many of them) in single round.
This concept is about balancing the game, something that should be of interest to you. Your level 300+ character won't matter to these changes since you can kill anything right now and will be able to in the future...
ahh.. sorry i was unclear...
When i comment something about balansing AT, etc. I try to comment as an typically player (build lvl 20-50).. Currently i play monk (lvl 25 unarmour, barehanded) and Knight (lvl 52 heavy armour two-handed weapon)
... i know that my main and secondary builds are both godlike owerpowered
combat is about to be overhauled - heavily.
this will change everything...
from altering how our level-ups effect the game,
and new options for combat...
(like aggressive & passive stances!) [yes, possibly a new button]
or, using Samuel's old idea... a slide bar for "how aggressive you are as you walk"
(he's ALREADY coded it - over a year ago)
take Oskar's Poll & help the community determine what we work on next!
we did the same with the last update.
asking the community what should be worked on next...
and the concepts that received the most votes were updated, modified & added / removed.
we have even been considering ranged attacks, again...
and this time we have ideas on how it could fit into the game.
yeah, arrows or magic...
who knows?
have some faith & patience.
we are few & the demands are many.
we do what we can, when we can, as much as we can.
take care heroes!
(or take chances?)
Nah, I posted this long text on request of Oskar, after discussing this concept through PM. Just wondering if anybody is able to build on this DPR idea.
i have missed quite a few meetings recently, after never missing one...
so - i am in the dark on some things.
thanks for the head's up!
i finally made a meeting recently & it was just Oskar & myself.
it was great, because we could be direct...
but i didn't get a chance to catch up behind the scenes.
it's great to have such a thriving community - for a game that is so brutally hard to work on & update.
there is so much more "going on" than you even know - for every member of the dev team.
it's not my place to detail things,
but i'm stunned this release came so quickly...
tragedy filled the waiting period.
so - be nice to the guys giving stuff away free & still asking what they can do better.
we just wanna make a sweet freakin game that anyone can have
and anyone can help with - or even build as thier own.
I would love to be on the dev team. Next time I'm in town I'm going to look up map making.. I think I gotta download an app for it and if so ill do it.
Of course a forum isn't for sharing such details Nyktos, whatever RL stuff has happened, be strong and know I've had my own share. My positive thoughts are with you guys.
AT is just a game, after all
Happy that DPR as a concept is taken into rebalancing, hope the way of thinking helps to find a way that is managable (rebalancing eats much time, maybe not in coding but in testing... ugh...).
Thystonius, I think your idea is an excellent suggestion. Awesome work explaining it, and thank you for taking the time to do so!
In general, we tend to strive for what's realistic when designing the game, where applicable. The example with a toothpick was brought up during one of our discussions (thanks ctnbeh13!). With the current system, a reasonably leveled-up player would be able to inflict massive amounts of damage per hit using a dull toothpick, since all attacks get the base damage bonus. The difference in damage per attack compared to, say, the Skullcrusher, would be insignificant if you've leveled up past a certain point. That's totally unrealistic, and something we'd like to fix.
Instead, we'd like to have it so that the proverbial toothpick should only do a minor amount of damage per attack, mostly unrelated to how much you've leveled up. After all, even if you've trained toothpick-mastery your whole life, it is unlikely that you would stand a chance against someone who has trained sword mastery her whole life. The Skullcrusher, however, should be a fairly bad weapon when untrained in it, and a formidable instrument of death once you know how to use it.
I think the concept of having a percentage on each weapon that defines how much of the wielder's base attack damage is used, is an excellent suggestion. Anyone have a clever idea on how we should assign initial values to that percentage for all of our existing items?
Also, there are a couple of edge-cases we would have to consider:
- Weapon proficiency skills should probably affect this percentage somehow. Anyone with ideas on values for this?
- Unarmed combat needs to benefit from the base attack damage somehow. Values for that?
- How would dual-wielding work with that percentage? It would seem unfair to give the percentage base attack damage bonus for both the main and the off-hand weapon.
We want the game feel realistic. In that case what if we made some sort of training area near crossglen? What I mean by that is inorder to increase the way the weapon affects the player stats you have to master the weapon it self. In the training center a master sword fighter teaches you a certain type of sword fighting. Now so that the players doesn't get to overpowered by mastering the sword fighting skill we set Lvl limits. First skilll starts at Lvl one and works its way up to Lvl xxx.
We can make this as a quest that with every skill we learn we get xx amount of XP.
And so the game stays balanced we get 1sp for ever 4 lvls. How about if every 5 lvls we get to increase our knowledge on sat sword mastery. And every time we master that said level our mastery goes up. 001% or .01% till we reach 100%% mastered. It will keep the game balanced and force the player to go to the training center every 5 lvls if the player wishes to get stronger.
I suggest that the base damage percentage would be for a simple long sword, i.e. that category gets the multiplier of 1.0, without any proficiencies. Bare handed would be least to start, perhaps 0.5? Club, dagger, short sword, scaling up from there. Two handed swords starting around 1.3-1.4ish. Proficiency skills raise the percentage each level. Bare handed perhaps gaining more per level so that a master can still do alot of damage.
I'm not married to the numbers...they would need to be balanced in playtesting anyway.
Proficiencies could also increase AC as you go. Relatively easy weapons to handle, like a dagger, might start with a higher AC, and the AD goes up faster add you add skill levels. A big clumsy weapon in the hands of a beginner might start with a relatively high AD but poor AC (when you actually manage to get it on target it *will* hurt), and then increase AC faster as you learn to wield it more effectively.
I'd also like to see additional levels of mastery that could only be acquired after performing a quest later in the game for a greater teacher. In Nor City or Feygard - a big city where such a master would be expected to settle. Better yet, one master in each city, with different skills to teach...choose wisely!
oskarwiksten wrote:Thystonius, I think your idea is an excellent suggestion. Awesome work explaining it, and thank you for taking the time to do so!
In general, we tend to strive for what's realistic when designing the game, where applicable. The example with a toothpick was brought up during one of our discussions (thanks ctnbeh13!). With the current system, a reasonably leveled-up player would be able to inflict massive amounts of damage per hit using a dull toothpick, since all attacks get the base damage bonus. The difference in damage per attack compared to, say, the Skullcrusher, would be insignificant if you've leveled up past a certain point. That's totally unrealistic, and something we'd like to fix.
Instead, we'd like to have it so that the proverbial toothpick should only do a minor amount of damage per attack, mostly unrelated to how much you've leveled up. After all, even if you've trained toothpick-mastery your whole life, it is unlikely that you would stand a chance against someone who has trained sword mastery her whole life. The Skullcrusher, however, should be a fairly bad weapon when untrained in it, and a formidable instrument of death once you know how to use it.
I think the concept of having a percentage on each weapon that defines how much of the wielder's base attack damage is used, is an excellent suggestion. Anyone have a clever idea on how we should assign initial values to that percentage for all of our existing items?
Also, there are a couple of edge-cases we would have to consider:
- Weapon proficiency skills should probably affect this percentage somehow. Anyone with ideas on values for this?
- Unarmed combat needs to benefit from the base attack damage somehow. Values for that?
- How would dual-wielding work with that percentage? It would seem unfair to give the percentage base attack damage bonus for both the main and the off-hand weapon.
Anyway, excellent idea, Thystonius!
+1 I love to see more ideas about balancing combat ... and i will be the first master of toothpick..
