Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

What are we currently working on.
User avatar
Arrakis
 
Posts: 3904
Joined: 25 Oct 2013, 14:11
Location: Sparksvaard, the middle world; the world of people.

Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Arrakis » 27 Jan 2017, 15:20

Hey feudalists!

This week’s Dev Blog is fully dedicated to your feedback on the current state of our combat system. We’ve got lots to talk about, so if you’re interested in what to expect of the (near) future of combat, you may want to sit back (possibly pop the kettle on) and prepare for a mountain of info!
General combat-related feedback + changes

Firstly, we would like to introduce the bonus from wearing certain types of armor to suit a certain type of class/play-style. Roughly, we see the following meta groups:

  • Padded - bonus to pikes and anti-cavalry polearm weapons, less damage from impact with horses
  • Leather - bonus to bows and crossbows and increased armor penetration
  • Chainmail - increased mounted combat damage and horse maneuverability
  • Scale mail - one-handed weapon damage bonus, plus bonus to shields
  • Plate - bonus to two-handed weapon damage and chance to avoid poisoning from one-handed weapons
    We want to underline that bonuses will be relatively small and in no way should prevent other combinations of weapons/armor.

rimg


Another issue that you guys have brought up a few times is the difference between combat and peaceful stances, and the fact that you can switch those instantly and without any cooldown. While speed, stamina drain, received damage and other such factors of war and peaceful stances are necessary for our gameplay, we do agree that some kind of cooldown would be beneficial in order to prevent multiple stance changes during combat for certain advantages.

The affectionately named, ‘face hugging’ is another issue that some of our players have reported. This tactic involves being at point-blank range while bending forward, allowing the player to hit an opponent's legs and avoid most damage from their opponent’s attack. We believe it is acceptable for one handed weapons, but we want to provide a countermeasure for it - thus, we plan to implement a ‘push’ ability, which will be available to all melee weapons. Depending on a weapon’s weight, it will push your opponent backward and apply a short stagger; it should be enough to increase the distance and give a chance to distance yourself from the ‘face hugger’ tactic.

Another important tweak that we plan to implement is to add weapon durability into the damage formula. A good warrior should always be prepared for combat, thus we want to boost the importance of the Equipment Maintain skill also.

Finally, we plan to make it possible for melee weapons to be able to reduce certain amounts of damage to movable objects (furniture, crafting devices, containers etc). Additionally, in the meantime we’re planning on implementing a new type of damage: chopping. A variety of axes will deal chopping damage; it will be advantageous for breaking shields and slightly better at breaking movable objects. In terms of armor resistance, chopping-type damage will be in between the slashing and piercing types of damage; not that good vs unarmored enemies and not as good at armor penetration as the piercing damage.

Cavalry Meta

We’ve heard a lot of concerns from our two-legged players about the prevalence of four-legged fighters in the battles during the MMO Closed Beta Tests. First of all, we must state that we do believe it is completely logical and correct that, at this current stage of the Closed Beta Tests, most of the participants prefer mounts and lances for increased mobility.

The thing is, it is completely normal that, once two sides meet each other on the vast open plains of the MMO map, they prefer to keep mobile for advantage - and infantry feels itself like a disadvantage. It is actually completely normal and realistic; skirmishes in open plains are typically more suited for light cavalry due to their mobility. The main reason it’s so beneficial is because there are no objectives that either side have to control in some way, so we’ve come up with a plan to let infantry shine!

In instanced battles, we plan on implementing a King of the Hill system; where a certain zone in the middle of the map should contain the majority of your forces. During sieges, attackers must fight through your forces and reach the monument to destroy it. In this kind of situation, cavalry will not be able to provide a strong foothold on an objective, and that is where infantry can come to play!

We also have heavy cavalry to consider. We believe that heavy warhorses fill a niche where you need to provide a strong charge against enemy infantry frontlines and have the capacity to soak up much more damage than light cavalry types can typically sustain. For increased advantage for cavalry against infantry, we plan to let mounted players wield and use hand-and-a-half swords for increased reach.

Another topic you guys have discussed is the ol’ ‘pocket ponies’ issue; players can ride a horse and still technically hold another horse in their inventory. One of our aims within the Life is Feudal world is to keep the level of realism to a pretty sufficient level, but not to the extent that means crazy, excessive actions that are a total bore just in the name of ‘realism’! So with this in mind, we are going to leave ‘pocket ponies’ in place. In the meantime, we will significantly increase the time it takes (15-20 seconds) to ‘pack’ and ‘unpack’ your pocket pony, making it a lot harder to use them in the heat of a battle. Packing and unpacking via stables will be just as fast as it is now though.

rimg


We also want to increase the value of horses, especially of the trained warhorses - therefore using your horse as a living shield will come at a price. Later on, we plan on adding basic AI to horses; they’ll want to run away if they don’t have a rider and are receiving damage, so you may just want to reconsider using your trusty stead as a movable shield!

Formations and cavalry is another issue we want to address for you. Firstly, we plan to tweak the skill tree in a way that formation skills will be available to everyone without any prerequisite skills. Secondly, we plan to tweak and slightly boost mounted formation bonuses, making it possible and beneficial to make a classic wedge heavy cavalry charge.

All the same, we also want to provide a combat order that will affect all infantry inside the formation, increasing their resistance to knockdowns caused by horses. Ideally, we’re picturing a warrior in padded armor, equipped with a pike or anti-cavalry polearm, standing inside a formation that just received the ‘hold your ground’ order, being able to resist a cavalry charge with an almost 100% chance to do so successfully. The horse knockdown damage will be classified as ‘blunt’ damage.

Bugfixes and Tweaks

Female models are widely used in combat. After some investigation we’ve realized that, due to a pesky bug, female models’ weapon reach is the same as the male models’ reach, while having a smaller hitbox. We plan to fix this issue ASAP to ensure it’s fair.

rimg


We fixed a relatively old bug, where a player could swing their pike while doing a thrusting attack, resulting in a huge amount of speed bonus and damage. You will see the fix in the closest patch.

There is also a slight formula bug with a spear’s thrusting damage, which leads to a good amount of damage being dealt even if the actual speed is not that high. We’re working on a fix for that bug soon, along with the Iron Grip ability bug.

We also feel that it is important to tweak the minimal energy/damage that bow users can inflict now, making it possible for them to kite their opponents. They will have to spend some time pulling the string before the bow will be able to deal any significant damage.

Combat preparation objects will become slightly cheaper, with a slightly easier way to build them, so we expect to see those objects in larger battles with some kind of objective for both sides that has to be quickly fortified.

Last, but by no means least on our tweaks agenda, we’re planning on removing the 100% stagger from the handles/shaft hits of weapons. Phew!


We want to thank you for taking the time to read and understand all of this week’s rather bulky dev blog - obviously we now know who are truly devoted fans! :p

Nothing is completely set in stone yet (except for bug fixes, of course) so right now, we’re really open to your additional feedback - so let us know what you think in the comments below!

- The Team


User avatar
Khan-
Zealous Believer
 
Posts: 1251
Joined: 18 Apr 2015, 15:12
Location: France

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Khan- » 27 Jan 2017, 15:21

Disponible en Française : Ici !



let's test that



maybe with the 64bits ? :D
Last edited by Khan- on 27 Jan 2017, 16:25, edited 2 times in total.
100% French speaking alliance of Royaume Franc : http://lifeisfeudal-fr.com/
Image
Les Témoins de Mérovée Site - Forum - Me contacter


Arthur Pendragon
Zealous Believer
 
Posts: 26
Joined: 29 Jul 2016, 00:00

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Arthur Pendragon » 27 Jan 2017, 15:32

Best news ever (for me)

I love the idea of horses running away when unmouted and taking damage.

User avatar
Worldsprayer
Alpha Tester
 
Posts: 49
Joined: 27 Dec 2013, 08:19

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Worldsprayer » 27 Jan 2017, 15:33

"For increased advantage for cavalry against infantry, we plan to let mounted players wield and use hand-and-a-half swords for increased reach."

I assume this means that hand and a halfers (aka longswords...a very chivalrous weapon I might add) won't be so deep into the warrior tree, or moved into chivalry, since now you're talking about having to go warrior AND chivalry in order to use a classic knight-build, especially since bastard/long-sword's are SO deep in warrior.
Service is Glory
Death in Service
Death is Glory


Sharana
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 644
Joined: 06 Nov 2014, 17:03

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Sharana » 27 Jan 2017, 15:50

Worldsprayer wrote:"For increased advantage for cavalry against infantry, we plan to let mounted players wield and use hand-and-a-half swords for increased reach."

I assume this means that hand and a halfers (aka longswords...a very chivalrous weapon I might add) won't be so deep into the warrior tree, or moved into chivalry, since now you're talking about having to go warrior AND chivalry in order to use a classic knight-build, especially since bastard/long-sword's are SO deep in warrior.


The 2handed blades mastery skill contains both 2h swords like Claymore and Zweihander and half-hand swords like the Estoc. The players suggestion I wrote in the long letter with combat feedback was to move those half-handed swords from the 2h blades mastery skill to the mounted fighting mastery skill. You can use them from horseback, they were just unreachable with 400 skillcap as they were in different trees.
Image


Pette
 
Posts: 6
Joined: 04 Jul 2015, 04:01

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Pette » 27 Jan 2017, 15:51

Shield bash already exist for people facehugging (beside the fact I do not get why you would want to nerf a tactic. Those make the game intresting.)

There is already a cooldown to attack after changing peaceful to combat mode. That is enough.

25 to 30. Those are damages you do with a 100Q boar spear on regular chain against 60 with a maul and 18 with a broad axe. An average of 15 regarding most types of armor : You really want to equalize all the weapons damage to a low standard? I beg you, remember how many times we had weapons damage swapping from low to extra high to low to a bit high to now.
Stupid.

Please fix the fact not only the leader of a unit gets the scaling benefits AND the fact we cannot use formations on horseback before tweaking details.

Gj for fixing handle stun. That was a pain.

On a side note, no one will charge straight on a wall of pike. Might be smarter to fix something else.

Regarding the 'premade meta', I see no point in those but why not.

We always could of use bastard swords on horseback. Always. (Even apply poison).


Sharana
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 644
Joined: 06 Nov 2014, 17:03

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Sharana » 27 Jan 2017, 16:06

Pette wrote: - Shield bash already exist for people facehugging (beside the fact I do not get why you would want to nerf a tactic. Those make the game intresting.)

- There is already a cooldown to attack after changing peaceful to combat mode. That is enough.

- You really want to equalize all the weapons damage to a low standard? I beg you, remember how many times we had weapons damage swapping from low to extra high to low to a bit high to now.
Stupid.

- We always could of use bastard swords on horseback. Always. (Even apply poison).



- facehugging as tactic is way too common, good and looks silly. Very big part of the community doesn't like the females+facehugging combo. And devs agree with that - I hope some pros won't feel less pro if it's a bit harder after some hitbox changes, esp where parry or shield block actually covers the feets.

- entering/exiting warstance is getting abused for hit and run tactics + stamina regen. Cooldown on each change like after the flee is more then logical - make your mind if you are going to fight or just hit and run.

- Bobik said in the interviews he was invited on last year that he want the MMO combat to last longer. So yes it's lower damage for many weapons + many have high const builds which prologs fight further.

- we could always use estoc and even poison it, but the weapon was in the 2h swords skill. Now it's getting moved to the mounted fighting mastery, 400 skillcap after all. Can't get it from the old place.
Last edited by Sharana on 30 Jan 2017, 12:28, edited 2 times in total.
Image

User avatar
MSB4Revy
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 24
Joined: 11 Jun 2015, 15:25

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by MSB4Revy » 27 Jan 2017, 16:07

Arthur Pendragon wrote:Best news ever (for me)

I love the idea of horses running away when unmouted and taking damage.

It is a great idea. But, if the horse run to the enemy lines it will be something like: "1001 ways to lose your horse"


Pette
 
Posts: 6
Joined: 04 Jul 2015, 04:01

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Pette » 27 Jan 2017, 16:37

Actually. Facehugging and aiming for shoes gave a really deep mechanic. Hence it is intresting.

Fine. If you want fights to be long. Nerf all the weapons. Not only the spear. (Don't forget the lance that can hit over 100ish). I also forgot to quote the 'wound HP limitation amount being extra damage'.

And concerning the pros. Don't worry we will always find a way to get the community hateful. From lance slashing to using untweaked capacities (arrow to the knee can be used twice, dismounting and drawing at top speed etc).


OKCAHA
True Believer
 
Posts: 7
Joined: 16 May 2016, 12:38

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by OKCAHA » 27 Jan 2017, 16:38

Классно! А лошади с тележками когда? :)


Sharana
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 644
Joined: 06 Nov 2014, 17:03

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Sharana » 27 Jan 2017, 18:13

Pette wrote:Don't worry we will always find a way to get the community hateful. From lance slashing to using untweaked capacities (arrow to the knee can be used twice, dismounting and drawing at top speed etc).


Of course. It's way more enjoyable to use stuff that you consider "untweaked capacities" then to send email to the devs explaining in details what's abused for unintentional advantage. Someone else will do ofc sooner or later, but as we know combat balance was never their focus. Let's hope they will put some thought into the combat during wave 2.

___________________________

More feedback:

You keep not liking the lancers even after many different communities submitted feedback saying it's not fine. There isn't much logic in the fact that someone (mainly archer or 2h weapons user) invests 30 points in chivalry (unlocking mounted fighting mastery on 0) and rides just as good (speed, maneuverability, dismounting chance) as dedicated lancer. Make it like the heavy horse where you can't sprint till you hit 30 (which means 60 chivalry before that as well) and then less chance to be dismounted with higher skill. If dedicated lancer collides with warhorse from archer/melee player with 0 mounted fighting mastery skill the lancer they shouldn't have the same chance to fall down from the horse. There is no logic in that. And that difference should be noticable.
Image

User avatar
Azzerhoden
Alpha Tester
 
Posts: 1600
Joined: 08 May 2014, 17:44

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Azzerhoden » 27 Jan 2017, 18:51

That is too much of a restriction. At 30 you can ride hardy warhorses, which is a better quality of horse.

If a more substantial reward is needed, reduce Stam use when riding with higher skills.
| - Alpha Tester and Zealous Believer
Image

Kingdom of Hyperion founding Duchy - A practical RP Community est. 1999 - Apply Today!


Sharana
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 644
Joined: 06 Nov 2014, 17:03

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Sharana » 27 Jan 2017, 18:53

Azzerhoden wrote:That is too much of a restriction. At 30 you can ride hardy warhorses, which is a better quality of horse.

If a more substantial reward is needed, reduce Stam use when riding with higher skills.


In which parallel universe the hardy warhorse is better? The hardy is worse then the heavy one which on his side is worse then the regular warhorse.
Image

User avatar
Lerp8674
True Believer
 
Posts: 16
Joined: 29 Oct 2016, 23:50

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Lerp8674 » 27 Jan 2017, 19:04

1. chopping. A variety of axes will deal chopping damage; it will be advantageous for breaking shields and slightly better at breaking movable objects. In terms of armor resistance, chopping-type damage will be in between the slashing and piercing types of damage; not that good vs unarmored enemies and not as good at armor penetration as the piercing damage.

Personally I think it should be named crushing damage, and have the ability to break armors like chain or scale =) but useless against plate. Overall I like this idea, hopefully the falchion could also get crushing damage =P

2. Premade meta? I'd prefer if armor was cheaper based on the region (sand,snow etc) by making the materials cheaper or something not really sure, but as someone else said why not, i dont really see necessity for it though.

3. Another issue that you guys have brought up a few times is the difference between combat and peaceful stances, and the fact that you can switch those instantly and without any cooldown. While speed, stamina drain, received damage and other such factors of war and peaceful stances are necessary for our gameplay, we do agree that some kind of cooldown would be beneficial in order to prevent multiple stance changes during combat for certain advantages.

I dont see an issue with this. It literally coincides with something you said about light horses. Why should light skirmishing infantry be any different? Besides they take double damage against anything, most people get shot and 1 hit if they step outside of combat stance. No issue IMO

4. We also feel that it is important to tweak the minimal energy/damage that bow users can inflict now, making it possible for them to kite their opponents. They will have to spend some time pulling the string before the bow will be able to deal any significant damage.

Depending on how bad the nerf is it shouldn't be too bad, but it will prolong skirmishes all in all. Overall there are ways to defeat current skirmishing forces, which i dont know why larger pvp groups arent acknowledging that. There is little need for changed mechanics if you know how to fight an archer, I can catch a naked archer with full armor on by doing the same strategy he uses, and if I have archers on my side contributing to the chase of a couple, you will damage them so much that they wont even want to engage you. There are literally strategies that can counter archers, but IMO its not archery that needs nerfed its their counters that need to be buffed. You talk of formations, why not make a shield wall formation, reducing damage from projectiles, but is something that be broken with a wedge or better yet, chopping(crushing ;D) weapons. Shields are supposed to be a counter to archery but the problem is you can shoot at their feet and head, especially if they are running with smaller shields. The other problem is how slow you move with shields. If people are tailing an archer and walking into terrain traps to get ambushed from the side by their buds, isnt that strategy? quit tailing an archer or two just to get lit the fuck up, then your frustrations will go away, you dont counter things by trying to play their game. Frankly another thing that should counter archers is mounted fighting mastery. Using a one hander on a horse right now is absolute garbage, why not work on that a bit before claiming everything to be OP, because mounted 1 handers are pretty much a direct counter to archers as well. All i'm saying is Vinterskorn fights with no calvary, and we manage no problem, even with heavy infantry. Choose your battles and tactics wisely, I wouldnt order a group of infantry to charge into a pack of archers because im not bad. As much as i love my Vintfantry, I dont think you should keep nerfing the things that can fuck up a 2hander or a poleaxemen, but start buffing the things that counter archers (shields, mounted fighting mastery). An archer fleeing away outside of combat stance will think twice if they can effectively get smoked by a knight sword via horse back.

5. King of the Hill system; where a certain zone in the middle of the map should contain the majority of your forces. During sieges, attackers must fight through your forces and reach the monument to destroy it. In this kind of situation, cavalry will not be able to provide a strong foothold on an objective, and that is where infantry can come to play!

Not really necessary, just make horses more exspensive. Light horses should be easy to dismount, and this literally is saying "mass horses OP, we are making a game mode that will allow you to mass infantry". Shouldnt this be something that you can take into mind when choosing terrain early on etc. For example, im building in the plains, and im super salty about how i can get shot and lanced by calvary, why wouldnt you try to match the play style of the terrain you decided to build in? This will dictate battle fields, and in turn dictate how you fight on them, if you want to win of course. Instanced battles in the sand should be in the sand, instanced battles in the forests should be in the forest. Hell the byzantine army was made up of predominantly calvary, and hired infantry mercs to use, this is something that adds depth to the game and can be pointed towards regional strategy (regional-diversity-to-help-grow-the-game-t22294/). This is where strategy comes into play and actually contributes to the depth of your game. If people are not willing to adjust then that is their fault. There are plenty of things you can do with horses, like reducing acceleration after charging into 5-6 infantry so they cant just turn around and do the same thing. Atleast this will make people consider when and when not to charge in with calvary, or atleast light calv.

User avatar
Azzerhoden
Alpha Tester
 
Posts: 1600
Joined: 08 May 2014, 17:44

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Azzerhoden » 27 Jan 2017, 19:30

Sharana wrote:
In which parallel universe the hardy warhorse is better? The hardy is worse then the heavy one which on his side is worse then the regular warhorse.

Let's separate current functionality give Bitbox the benefit of the doubt when it comes to implementing the design.

The Hardy should be better than a regular warhorse. Should have same speed, better Stam, and better life. Ergo, having a higher mounted skill should reward you with riding better mounts, using less animal stam.

Heavy horse doesn't even come into play here.
| - Alpha Tester and Zealous Believer
Image

Kingdom of Hyperion founding Duchy - A practical RP Community est. 1999 - Apply Today!


Sharana
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 644
Joined: 06 Nov 2014, 17:03

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Sharana » 27 Jan 2017, 19:40

Azzerhoden wrote:
Sharana wrote:
In which parallel universe the hardy warhorse is better? The hardy is worse then the heavy one which on his side is worse then the regular warhorse.

Let's separate current functionality give Bitbox the benefit of the doubt when it comes to implementing the design.

The Hardy should be better than a regular warhorse. Should have same speed, better Stam, and better life. Ergo, having a higher mounted skill should reward you with riding better mounts, using less animal stam.

Heavy horse doesn't even come into play here.


Hardy horse is the untrained variant of the heavy horse. It's also in the "heavy skill" - there is only the warhorse in the mounted fighting mastery. They way they see it is "light cavalry" (=warhorse) and "heavy cavalry" (=heavy warhorse). It's not straight up upgraid, they have different roles. And as said the heavy ones are better when charging the infantry and soaking up damage for the others. In the field against other horses they just don't have a stand. From that point of view unskilled person having access to the best horse (warhorse as balance between speed and hp) and riding it with the same speed + having the same dismount chance as players who dedicate everything to mounted fighting doesn't really sound fair.
Last edited by Sharana on 27 Jan 2017, 19:42, edited 1 time in total.
Image


Toren
True Believer
 
Posts: 148
Joined: 14 Oct 2014, 20:00

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Toren » 27 Jan 2017, 19:42

Lerp8674 wrote:3. Another issue that you guys have brought up a few times is the difference between combat and peaceful stances, and the fact that you can switch those instantly and without any cooldown. While speed, stamina drain, received damage and other such factors of war and peaceful stances are necessary for our gameplay, we do agree that some kind of cooldown would be beneficial in order to prevent multiple stance changes during combat for certain advantages.

I dont see an issue with this. It literally coincides with something you said about light horses. Why should light skirmishing infantry be any different? Besides they take double damage against anything, most people get shot and 1 hit if they step outside of combat stance. No issue IMO


To be fair, if you just run high agi and light armor you'll still be able to be an effective skirmisher with unlimited sprint bar. This change won't really hurt skirms as much as it will hurt hit and run horse archers.

User avatar
Azzerhoden
Alpha Tester
 
Posts: 1600
Joined: 08 May 2014, 17:44

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Azzerhoden » 27 Jan 2017, 19:57

Sharana wrote:
Hardy horse is the untrained variant of the heavy horse. It's also in the "heavy skill" - there is only the warhorse in the mounted fighting mastery. They way they see it is "light cavalry" (=warhorse) and "heavy cavalry" (=heavy warhorse). It's not straight up upgraid, they have different roles. And as said the heavy ones are better when charging the infantry and soaking up damage for the others. In the field against other horses they just don't have a stand. From that point of view unskilled person having access to the best horse (warhorse as balance between speed and hp) and riding it with the same speed + having the same dismount chance as players who dedicate everything to mounted fighting doesn't really sound fair.


Hardy maybe the base horse for Heavy, but it can be ridden on its own. From the wiki:

30 Cavalry attacks become twice as fast.
Can ride Hardy Warhorses.

As such it is/should be a superior warhorse that could be trained to heavy, if desired.
| - Alpha Tester and Zealous Believer
Image

Kingdom of Hyperion founding Duchy - A practical RP Community est. 1999 - Apply Today!

User avatar
Azzerhoden
Alpha Tester
 
Posts: 1600
Joined: 08 May 2014, 17:44

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Azzerhoden » 27 Jan 2017, 20:10

Actually, axes were a preferred weapon against plate and less so against chain as the interlinking dispersed the incoming damage.
| - Alpha Tester and Zealous Believer
Image

Kingdom of Hyperion founding Duchy - A practical RP Community est. 1999 - Apply Today!


Hallegra
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 135
Joined: 05 Dec 2014, 00:13

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Hallegra » 27 Jan 2017, 20:19

I'm pretty confused as to why you have to be locked into a specific armour type to realize the full potential of your weapon. As a plate-armoured knight, I can't use a sword and shield as well as someone wearing scale armour? The armour types are already balanced with weight and speed, why does adding flat bonuses help?

If I were a padded-wearing fighter, I can't wield a two-handed sword as well as someone wearing full plate armour because "meta"? It just doesn't really seem why this is being implemented apart from the devs wanting to go back to their "classes" that they were pushing in the alpha.

User avatar
Lerp8674
True Believer
 
Posts: 16
Joined: 29 Oct 2016, 23:50

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Lerp8674 » 27 Jan 2017, 20:22

Toren wrote:
Lerp8674 wrote:3. Another issue that you guys have brought up a few times is the difference between combat and peaceful stances, and the fact that you can switch those instantly and without any cooldown. While speed, stamina drain, received damage and other such factors of war and peaceful stances are necessary for our gameplay, we do agree that some kind of cooldown would be beneficial in order to prevent multiple stance changes during combat for certain advantages.

I dont see an issue with this. It literally coincides with something you said about light horses. Why should light skirmishing infantry be any different? Besides they take double damage against anything, most people get shot and 1 hit if they step outside of combat stance. No issue IMO


To be fair, if you just run high agi and light armor you'll still be able to be an effective skirmisher with unlimited sprint bar. This change won't really hurt skirms as much as it will hurt hit and run horse archers.


I suppose, I'll read through it but pretty sure someone mentioned making it harder to ride a warhorse. If thats what its trying to counter then I think theres other ways to go about it. Making them only able to ride regular horses to achieve that would be fine. Although I would like to see mounted archery as a thing. The only other thing i can think of is people missing a pike thrust and running.


Sharana
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 644
Joined: 06 Nov 2014, 17:03

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Sharana » 27 Jan 2017, 20:34

They want to allow everyone to ride trained warhorse. Besides the main think they dislike is the hit and run (meaning you are running, enter warstance, hit and exit again to keep running) tacics and the stamina regain (you are low on stamina after few bad swings, you just exit the warstance and in 2 or so seconds you are full stamina). The slight possibility that you will get hit while outside of warstance is not punishing enough. After all one should make his mind - eiher fight or not, why should we allow unrestricted switch between peace and warstance when there are such differences between them?

Hallegra wrote:I'm pretty confused as to why you have to be locked into a specific armour type to realize the full potential of your weapon.

Can't say I like it either. There are some types of armors I find ugly and don't want to see them on me, yet I will have to use them most likely. Depends on how big the bonuses will be...
My guess is they try hard to make each armor viable instead of just making padded/leather one dirty cheap and lighter then they are now. Because when you need almost the same amount of linen cloth why would anyone pick up the leather armors instead of let's say chainmail.
Image

User avatar
Lerp8674
True Believer
 
Posts: 16
Joined: 29 Oct 2016, 23:50

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Lerp8674 » 27 Jan 2017, 20:52

Sharana wrote:They want to allow everyone to ride trained warhorse. Besides the main think they dislike is the hit and run (meaning you are running, enter warstance, hit and exit again to keep running) tacics and the stamina regain (you are low on stamina after few bad swings, you just exit the warstance and in 2 or so seconds you are full stamina). The slight possibility that you will get hit while outside of warstance is not punishing enough. After all one should make his mind - eiher fight or not, why should we allow unrestricted switch between peace and warstance when there are such differences between them?

Hallegra wrote:I'm pretty confused as to why you have to be locked into a specific armour type to realize the full potential of your weapon.

Can't say I like it either. There are some types of armors I find ugly and don't want to see them on me, yet I will have to use them most likely. Depends on how big the bonuses will be...
My guess is they try hard to make each armor viable instead of just making padded/leather one dirty cheap and lighter then they are now. Because when you need almost the same amount of linen cloth why would anyone pick up the leather armors instead of let's say chainmail.


As torren said, you are probably running with high agility anyway as an archer, so it doesnt really make a difference. And if thats the case make the stamina regen the same. I wasnt even aware that the regen is different. Seemed to be something of the past that doesn't really apply atm.

"(meaning you are running, enter warstance, hit and exit again to keep running)" most people who try this type of strategy get destroyed with the changes between combat and peaceful stance.

"why should we allow unrestricted switch between peace and warstance when there are such differences between them"

Because it doesnt give anyone an advantage that is great enough to break the game, and you are trying to limit tactics in favor of others

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hit-and-run_tactics

I've said it before and i'll say it again, nerfing skirmishing tactics does nothing but favor large guilds, who will now have the ability to completely win field battles due to the fact they can park infantry on a hill and GG.

People focus way too much on 1v1 scenarios
Last edited by Lerp8674 on 27 Jan 2017, 21:34, edited 2 times in total.


Hallegra
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 135
Joined: 05 Dec 2014, 00:13

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Hallegra » 27 Jan 2017, 21:07

The choice of what armour to wear is based off of two factors: speed and protection. Currently, if you go for more protection, you trade that off with reduced movement speed. If you go for less protection, you gain increased movement speed as a result.
What this means is that your armour choice is not relevant to what weapon you're wielding past a certain point. You are able to choose seperately what you want to fight with and what you want to wear.

This meta that is being suggested is where specific armour types offer a straight boost to damage. This makes it so that your choice of both weapon and armour is combined. I'm wondering when this turned into a fantasy game, with magical boosts to damage based on your "armour of +1 pikes"...


You choose your weapon, then you choose if you want to be faster or slower. I choose a poleaxe, do I want to be a quick poleaxe fighter or a heavily armoured lawbringer? I pick a two-handed axe, do I now want to be a naked berserker or a heavily armoured housecarl? By linking specific weapon types to specific armour types, you take that choice away. You are penalizing people who decide to go as a padded sword/board user, or a scale-clad pikeman.

This proposed armour stat boost system is moving life is feudal away from the realism-oriented view and more towards the fantasy realm of specific classes. Not a horrible change, but one that moves away from the life is feudal view.

User avatar
Azzerhoden
Alpha Tester
 
Posts: 1600
Joined: 08 May 2014, 17:44

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Azzerhoden » 27 Jan 2017, 21:27

Keep in mind that if Bitbox wanted 'realism' they would pick a specific year and folks would be limited to the armor available then. Instead they are using armor from a ra of years, ignoring the technological improvements made to that armor year over year. If they didn't we would all be wearing tempered plate.

So, to avoid a realistic time line of armor development they want to encourage diversity by adding in slight bonuses.
| - Alpha Tester and Zealous Believer
Image

Kingdom of Hyperion founding Duchy - A practical RP Community est. 1999 - Apply Today!

User avatar
Lerp8674
True Believer
 
Posts: 16
Joined: 29 Oct 2016, 23:50

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Lerp8674 » 27 Jan 2017, 21:35

Azzerhoden wrote:Keep in mind that if Bitbox wanted 'realism' they would pick a specific year and folks would be limited to the armor available then. Instead they are using armor from a ra of years, ignoring the technological improvements made to that armor year over year. If they didn't we would all be wearing tempered plate.

So, to avoid a realistic time line of armor development they want to encourage diversity by adding in slight bonuses.


Thats something that is more or less encouraged by the current skill progression, and in my opinion they are probably fine tuning it so that it is structured that way.

Also adding half handers to mounted fighting mastery doesnt really make sense. An estoc is used to kill plate guys, and was used by shield infantry

User avatar
Knar
Zealous Believer
 
Posts: 31
Joined: 20 Sep 2014, 15:38

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Knar » 27 Jan 2017, 22:17

I like a lot of these changes, except for the armor bonuses. They are unrealistic and will force people to wear certain armors for the role they want to play.

Maybe make it so heavier armors swing slower or something realistic like that, but don't add magic bonuses just for wearing armor.


Toren
True Believer
 
Posts: 148
Joined: 14 Oct 2014, 20:00

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Toren » 27 Jan 2017, 22:38

To expand on the in and out of combat issue, I do think the change will be nice. Like I said earlier, true skirmishers wont have anything changed with this. The whole issue revolved around the fact that out of combat you have no sprint bar, stam drains slower and regens faster. IMO a simple 30 second debuff that makes it so your stamina and sprint work the same way they did in combat that takes place right after going out of combat stance would be a pretty simple fix that wouldn't hurt noobies who accidentally hit R in the middle of a fight.

The whole tap firing with the bow thing has bothered me for awhile. Nice to see it finally getting changed. Lerp has a point about buffing the counters to archers over nerfing bows to a certain extent though. When an arbalest hits a shield for 40 durability damage, is it the crossbows too strong or the shield too weak? That being said I do really hate the fact that in the game right now a lower skilled player with a bow can beat a higher skilled player in 90% of situations just due to how mobility functions in game (but thats what they are already talking about with the horse change and combat stance, so nvrmind I guess).

For the warhorses issue, I think if a "Troop Horse" was added that had the same speed as a saddle horse but more stam, health, and didnt flinch was added it would help to solve the issue of people being able to get away clean with 30 chivalry and no mounted fighting mastery. Make it so you have to train on this horse until 30 or 60 mounted fighting mastery and rebalance hardy and spirited around this. That way troops could still ride around the map without being hindered by the saddle horses low stam yet they would be outclassed by actual mounted fighters while on the saddle.

I too doubt the whole armor changes part will work that well. Not saying that armor doesn't need some tweaking, but I don't know if this will make it better. As cool as these changes sound on paper, I doubt they will play out how expected.

Final note- Is the Pollaxe going to do chopping or slashing damage? It does have an axe head, and it would make sense compared to the other poleaxes.


Some_Jerk
True Believer
 
Posts: 53
Joined: 29 Feb 2016, 19:30

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Some_Jerk » 27 Jan 2017, 23:30

I just want to voice my opinion against combat bonuses for armor types. I can't express enough of how bad an idea I think this is

" Padded - bonus to pikes and anti-cavalry polearm weapons, less damage from impact with horses
Leather - bonus to bows and crossbows and increased armor penetration
Chainmail - increased mounted combat damage and horse maneuverability
Scale mail - one-handed weapon damage bonus, plus bonus to shields
Plate - bonus to two-handed weapon damage and chance to avoid poisoning from one-handed weapons
We want to underline that bonuses will be relatively small and in no way should prevent other combinations of weapons/armor."

Anyone who wishes to play any game on a competitive level will recognize that small bonuses can make a big difference. If you implement this it absolutely will prevent people from using other combinations of weapons and armor. It's not necessary and it certainly is not realistic.. which you folks mentioned is important to you. Please re-consider this.

I like the idea of there being a timer between stances, BUT we still have (What I think is) a problem with combat stance draining stamina way too quickly while running and being slower than normal stance. It's very hard to catch someone fleeing from you if you're using a melee weapon, and, while it shouldn't be dead simple, in many cases it just isn't possible. Perhaps it would be better if there was no run speed loss in combat stance?
On the other hand, maybe not being able to switch out of combat will prevent ranged users and others from being able to escape so easily?


Bestial
True Believer
 
Posts: 69
Joined: 13 Jun 2016, 02:16

Re: Development News #36 - Combat System Feedback + our Reaction!

Post by Bestial » 28 Jan 2017, 00:14

i hope in a siege i will be defending my castle and not some randomly generated hill with a monument on top!?!

Return to Development News