PDA

View Full Version : Review of new combat system


Jungle_Boy
December 24, 2011, 14:52
I've taken my half-troll warrior to level 17 so far, currently on dungeon level 12. Everything seems to be working, I've noticed my damage numbers changing when no equipment changes but I guess finesse and or prowess are somewhat level based so that is supposed to happen. I do miss a lot more it seems like and my normal hits don't seem to be crazy but when I get a critical look out! monster brains everywhere. It seems like there is a larger range of damage per hit. I think it takes me a few more swings to kill many things but so far has not negatively impacted game play. The only monster I couldn't kill so far was smeagol but that is no different than usual. I was able to hit him some but couldn't do enough damage before he took off.

As for problems, weapon pricing seems out of whack. They are way more expensive than anything else, both to buy and to sell, especially weapons with large prowess bonuses. Also my Inspect screen on my bolts says they do 125 damage per round but I shot a hairy mold and he barely noticed and when I hit him he was dead in one hit so I think the display is wrong.

One other question about the displayed average damage per round, does it take into account criticals? what about % to hit? It might be good to display the actual range of damage hits and the % to hit since it seems like there can be more variation than previously. some players will prefer a more steadily damaging weapon while some will want the big hits even if both do the same average damage per round.

Jungle_Boy
December 24, 2011, 15:05
I forgot to mention, the Inspect screen displays the correct damage damage even if the weapon bonuses are not known, not sure it really matters.

Derakon
December 24, 2011, 16:02
Thanks for the reports! Glad to hear nothing's horribly broken in the early game.

Finesse and prowess do improve with level, so you should find yourself dealing slightly more damage as you gain experience.

The 'I'nspect screen doesn't handle criticals properly yet, and it doesn't take chance to hit into account. I also didn't touch missile damage...in hindsight this means that the missile affixes are hilariously overpowered since they still got multiplied by 10. Uh oh!

Weapon prices are wrong because weapon power calculations are wrong. Sorry.

Magnate
December 24, 2011, 16:06
Thanks for the reports! Glad to hear nothing's horribly broken in the early game.

Finesse and prowess do improve with level, so you should find yourself dealing slightly more damage as you gain experience.

The 'I'nspect screen doesn't handle criticals properly yet, and it doesn't take chance to hit into account. I also didn't touch missile damage...in hindsight this means that the missile affixes are hilariously overpowered since they still got multiplied by 10. Uh oh!

Weapon prices are wrong because weapon power calculations are wrong. Sorry.Not your fault - I'm fixing the power calc now.

I don't think the inspect screen should adjust the damage according to the hit chance. It should give you the damage per hit, multiplied by blows per round. Because to-hit chance depends on which monster you're facing, and you can see that separately in monster recall.

But it should include anticipated damage from criticals though, unless we are planning to make the crit chance vary by monster absorption. IMO this would be good - very heavily armoured monsters should receive fewer crits than a normal monster.

I think perhaps we should talk about missile combat now ...

Jungle_Boy
December 24, 2011, 18:57
Not your fault - I'm fixing the power calc now.

I don't think the inspect screen should adjust the damage according to the hit chance. It should give you the damage per hit, multiplied by blows per round. Because to-hit chance depends on which monster you're facing, and you can see that separately in monster recall.

But it should include anticipated damage from criticals though, unless we are planning to make the crit chance vary by monster absorption. IMO this would be good - very heavily armoured monsters should receive fewer crits than a normal monster.

I think perhaps we should talk about missile combat now ...

Perhaps the display screen could display to hit chance and critical damage against an average monster to make comparing weapons easier.

Also missile affixes may have been multiplied by ten but I don't think the damage was because they do not seem to be doing a ton of damage.

fizzix
December 24, 2011, 19:36
Monster armour should now be in. It's a very rough run through, so feedback is definitely appreciated.

Magnate
December 24, 2011, 19:57
Perhaps the display screen could display to hit chance and critical damage against an average monster to make comparing weapons easier.I will argue strongly against this. It is bogus to conflate two completely different variables. Damage depends on the weapon, and to-hit depends on the monster. One belongs on the object description screen, the other belongs in monster recall.

EDIT: time for me to update my views, perhaps. Now that to-hit is so much simpler, we could put to-hit vs. 0 Ev in the object's description, just as the damage display will assume 0 armour. Maybe.Also missile affixes may have been multiplied by ten but I don't think the damage was because they do not seem to be doing a ton of damage.We'll get to this pretty soon - after fixing prices and randarts. Missile combat will be a little different (the multiplier is finally going to go, since it's replaced by heft, i.e. draw), but not as different as melee.

fizzix
December 24, 2011, 23:26
EDIT: time for me to update my views, perhaps. Now that to-hit is so much simpler, we could put to-hit vs. 0 Ev in the object's description, just as the damage display will assume 0 armour. Maybe.We'll get to this pretty soon - after fixing prices and randarts. Missile combat will be a little different (the multiplier is finally going to go, since it's replaced by heft, i.e. draw), but not as different as melee.

We need a new discussion of missile combat. When I think of an arrow striking a stone golem, I don't see it doing much damage. Right now though, it will damage it, while a dagger might have a tough time getting through. Maybe this is ok, but it's slightly troubling to me.

Magnate
December 24, 2011, 23:42
We need a new discussion of missile combat. When I think of an arrow striking a stone golem, I don't see it doing much damage. Right now though, it will damage it, while a dagger might have a tough time getting through. Maybe this is ok, but it's slightly troubling to me.oh dear. You're talking about the difference between absorption and deflection, and I don't think we want to go there.

fizzix
December 25, 2011, 00:07
oh dear. You're talking about the difference between absorption and deflection, and I don't think we want to go there.

Ok, forget about the details of reality. All I want is that missile combat isn't superior to all other forms of combat. The way we ensure this doesn't matter to me.

Magnate
December 25, 2011, 09:07
Ok, forget about the details of reality. All I want is that missile combat isn't superior to all other forms of combat. The way we ensure this doesn't matter to me.I think it should balance quite easily: missiles will have much better armour penetration (higher DPB), but way fewer shots than blows. So they'll be better against distant heavily-armoured targets, and much less good when you're surrounded by orcs. Seems pretty self-consistent to me, if we can ignore the irritation that golems ought to deflect arrows (and we could always special-case deflection if we really wanted, using a monster flag).

buzzkill
December 25, 2011, 15:08
If you want to make stone golems realistic, only a pick-axe should cause any damage :). I prefer to think of them as having a hard outer shell and being soft in the middle, like a clay golem with an advanced case of stone skin. A high velocity missile or heavy blow could penetrate the skin, or a very well placed blow could pierce a softer area, a joint. Maybe there's even room here to make heavier missiles move effective than lighter ones (aside from better dice) in certain situations.

I hope that a hearty point blank penalty is going to be imposed on archery since archery specific classes, the ones most likely to abuse point blank archery, will be able to ignore a light penalty. Were thrown shots/arrows ever sufficiently nerfed?

Mikko Lehtinen
December 25, 2011, 16:34
Which one would be more realistic/fun:

1) Difficulty of hitting at range is Monster Evasion + (Range * X).
2) Difficulty of hitting at range is Evasion * (Range/X).

In both options, X can depend on your launcher if you like.

I agree with having a big point blank penalty.

Magnate
December 25, 2011, 21:14
Which one would be more realistic/fun:

1) Difficulty of hitting at range is Monster Evasion + (Range * X).
2) Difficulty of hitting at range is Evasion * (Range/X).

In both options, X can depend on your launcher if you like.

I agree with having a big point blank penalty.So do I. I think your first equation is both simpler and will make for better gameplay. Having range geometrically related to evasion will make archery pointless against most evasive monsters I think. Even though it might actually feel more intuitive, I don't think the difference is big.

Mikko Lehtinen
December 26, 2011, 08:30
So do I. I think your first equation is both simpler and will make for better gameplay.

The first equation might be more realistic, too. Arrows and bolts are so fast that most of the dodging probably happens when the shooter is still targeting.

fizzix
December 26, 2011, 14:07
The first equation is what's currently in. Right now the monster gets a point of evasion for every 2 distance squares away. Perhaps that is not enough of a penalty?

Mikko Lehtinen
December 26, 2011, 15:21
The first equation is what's currently in. Right now the monster gets a point of evasion for every 2 distance squares away. Perhaps that is not enough of a penalty?

Hard to say. That should probably be determined in playtesting.

Fay 1.1 shows to-hit percentage in monster status line when targeting or looking at the monster. As a player, I had no idea about the effect of range until this feature was in -- I probably often tried to shoot at monsters even when to-hit chance was below 5%. I'd like to see something similar in Vanilla. (Unless you have a philosophy of keeping the exact information hidden from the player, which is fine by me.)

fizzix
December 27, 2011, 04:15
Hard to say. That should probably be determined in playtesting.

Fay 1.1 shows to-hit percentage in monster status line when targeting or looking at the monster. As a player, I had no idea about the effect of range until this feature was in -- I probably often tried to shoot at monsters even when to-hit chance was below 5%. I'd like to see something similar in Vanilla. (Unless you have a philosophy of keeping the exact information hidden from the player, which is fine by me.)

It can certainly be there. Right now the monster screen is a huge glut of information, mainly because we attempt to right everything in sentences. I think streamlining this is a good idea for both v4 and Vanilla.

buzzkill
December 27, 2011, 04:33
It can certainly be there. Right now the monster screen is a huge glut of information, mainly because we attempt to right everything in sentences. I think streamlining this is a good idea for both v4 and Vanilla.

Mikko referenced this info (archery to-hit %) being in the status line. That's where the monster HP is shown, right? That's a good spot for it if it's going to change every time either the player or the monster moves. Stuffing such rapidly changing info in the monster recall screen is kinda pointless.

Magnate
December 27, 2011, 08:33
It can certainly be there. Right now the monster screen is a huge glut of information, mainly because we attempt to right everything in sentences. I think streamlining this is a good idea for both v4 and Vanilla.Ah, now this is excellent:

1. We've been here before. Quite some time ago Derakon posted a mocked-up image of how a leaner but more informative monster recall could look.

2. Derakon joined the devteam to do the finesse/prowess combat changes.

3. Derakon's combat changes are in and now require other, tardier members of the devteam to do stuff (sorry). So Derakon is looking for something new to work on in the meantime ...

;-) ;-) ;-)

Derakon
December 27, 2011, 15:47
Magnate, truly you are a master of subtlety. There's a message somewhere in those lines you've written, but I'll need to spend some time decoding it...

(More seriously, we'll see how much hacking time I have)

Magnate
December 28, 2011, 09:48
Magnate, truly you are a master of subtlety. There's a message somewhere in those lines you've written, but I'll need to spend some time decoding it...Heh - only one of us is hailed as a Prophet on these boards ;-)(More seriously, we'll see how much hacking time I have)No worries. I think I will need your help with the 'I'spect screen to incorporate the finesse/prowess and EvAbs changes, so the more you grok the textblock display code, the better! I am thinking it really needs to be split into two screens - one for naked combat info (hit change, damage including slays/brands, and whatever critical info we want to include) and one for anything else (stat mods, resists, etc.). Not quite sure how to do this yet.

Nick
December 28, 2011, 11:38
Magnate, truly you are a master of subtlety. There's a message somewhere in those lines you've written, but I'll need to spend some time decoding it...

I don't think you realise the full horror of your situation. You have been taken to the Pits of Angband (v4), where you will now write code as a thrall until you die of exhaustion. If you should escape, don't expect any sympathy from the forums. You have been the captive of Magnate (seriously - how could Morgoth think he would get away with such a similar name?), and acting only as his agent.