Just curious about stuff that deals with combat that likely might have been possible for CoX but was difficult to implement or stuff that was just impossible (or near impossible without a lot of juryrigging that would just feel unprofessional) for CoX but would have been something to make combat more dynamic and fun. Some things I've been thinking of:
[b]Blocking -[/b] basically nullifies the effects of (an) incoming attack(s). It's not really something you could do in CoX because damage was calculated at the end of an animation. If you didn't, for instance, use your tier9 defense power *before* that animation ended, the attack(s) would still go through. What I'm talking about is a tad more reactive but it would require the damage to be calculated upon impact of the attack. Blocking could be incorporated in various types of tactics such as an ability for tanker-types to defend his team, a short-term solution to a fragile blaster-type's problems, or a support ability so your force field defender-type can be more reactive than just bubbles-and-go.
[b]Tiered Mez - [/b]One issue that came with mez is that, either the foe was pretty much a statue or your mez was useless. People threw out ideas like tiered mez effects like rather than completely turn a foe against its friends with confuse, when a foe is 'partially' confused, he's going to miss attacks on your team and when he does, it will hit the foe's friends instead. Or with hold, only some of the enemy's attacks are disabled (like most everything but the basic attacks). Stack more mez and it increases the effects of that mez to the point that confused target is practically aiming at his buddies or that held foe can't move or act at all. A tiered mez system would allow multiple types of 'minor mezzing' work in conjunction to help fully shut down foes (so multiple controllers could stack their holds or different mez to make the foe far less effective or even different non-controller types can contribute what minor mez they have to aid in helping the controller fully shut stuff down) and it would also make it so you don't have to make mez completely ineffective against high scaled mobs like Archvillains, just make it so it's very very hard to fully shut them down.
[b]Charge Attacks -[/b] I know it's been mentioned that charge attacks were going to be put into CoT, but how are we allowed to use them? I mean, can I use a charge attack on a target I know is out of range so that I can move closer to them? Can I use them when no target is chosen? Or would we need to implement different types of Charge-Through attacks that were like AoE versions of charge attacks that hit in a line?
[b]Gimmicks -[/b] One thing I enjoyed about CoX's powersets was that, moreso with the newer sets, they tended to have gimmicks rolled into them to make each set feel unique in its own way. Not really the secondary effects of the sets, but like Combos with Street Justice, Momentum with Titan Weapons, Stances with Staff and Dual Pistols, so on and so forth. So what is the thought behind putting certain gimmicks into different sets or power bases? If you guys really are looking into that, it would be splendid if such gimmicks were tied to the set bases so if you didn't like a certain gimmick, you could pick something with a different one or one without then apply the secondary effects/animations to that base.
Blocking
This has been mentioned in a few threads, along with other "Twitch" based mechanics and I always come back to how those players with slower Internet connections will be negatively impacted by such due to lag. Im in Australia, pretty far from the US, and having only 1-2 secs to Block an attack will be problematic.
In FFXIV there is a particular boss fight where if you get hit by a certain attack it pushes you off the platform and you insta-die. That's it your dead, wait for a rez (if your lucky) or the entire team wipes. Ive had this happen so many times. Based on my screen I am out of the area for a good 1-2 secs but I still get pushed off and die.
In those other threads Red names have stated that Twitch based combat is NOT what they are aiming CoT at.
The Phoenix Rising Initiative Rules Lawyer
We aren't using a blocking mechanic, or any reaction based mechanics for defense or offense in the game other than the clicking of a power as it was like in CoH. That is to say like reacting to tanking damage and clicking a heal type of reaction.
I'm not at liberty to discuss our mez system other than to say we aren't fans of binary systems in general.
Charge Attacks and combat movement attacks are are two different things. Charging is the term we are using for an attack that you press and hold the power icon to execute an effect. Lunge attacks are attacks that move the character to a location foe an attack or to a target for an attack.
Gimmicks are what we call Set Effects and there will be sets that use them. They are something of a requirement to make similar sets distinctive from one another, or unique sets literally unique based on its theme because of the breadth of animation customization. They way powers are designed set effects can't be opted out or switched around I order to do so we would have to make literally multiple copies of powers with and without effects and then test each possible variation.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
It doesn't have to be 'twitch'. You can interpret what I say as twitch but I'm speaking in general, i.e. being able to react at all. I mean, was Regeneration in CoX 'twitch'? Not really, just very reactionary.
The concept I'd like to discuss with blocking are such things as:
- A tanker power that lets you stand in front of something to protect it. Can't really do that if the attacks are calculated once they animate.
- A defender erecting a barrier to shield an ally. The concept is possible but it's not in-line with the actual mechanic, i.e. you just buffed the ally's stats so subsequent attacks are blocked, not literally putting up a wall to bounce attacks off of.
- A blaster using a strong blast to shoot down enemy attacks. Not really possible.
The deal is, in CoX, you had stuff 'like' blocking (my favorite example was Divine Avalanche/Parry from the sword sets) by temporarily buffing defense to emulate a block using an object or barrier but this was due to limitations of the system. What I want to know is if the devs are looking into things that aren't just 'like' blocking by assuring they don't want to box themselves within limits of a system.
That's a shame. Again, it was a limit of CoX and work-arounds were used because of it. So CoX couldn't make powers like an ice wall or force barrier that blocked projectiles or couldn't use a shield to actually shield. Work-arounds like area defense buffs and what-not were required, kind of weakening the concept.
Semantics :P
You didn't talk about the other 'lunge' mechanics though, like can one use such an attack in multiple ways (such as to get closer or further from enemies) or boxed with specific types of AoEs. This was another limitation of CoX. I recall, when they were making Shield Defense's Shield Charge attack, they tried to make it hit in a line but ran into issues with the attack scaling its size or something so they just made it a 'teleport' PBAoE.
Basically, CoX had a lot of limitations and I know you guys' work is tracking what those limitations were and steering clear from falling into the same pitfalls, at least I believe that is what you said but it might have been in context of power customization and not the game's mechanics.
That's good to hear about the gimmicks too. That will assure I play a bajillion alts as I come up with concepts for how the gimmick is working for my characters. And to be honest, I started enjoying the game much more when those types of sets were introduced. Most of the early sets were sort of formulaic in their composition while the gimmick sets sort of traded stuff for other stuff. Although I'm curious what types of gimmicks you guys are thinking up.
Question... How much is too much as far as Gimmics in a powerset?
Which sets did you Prefer more that others that had a gimmicky feel?
Can you list most to least favorite?
Can you throw in your feelings on Dual Blades and where it stood, too? :D
Are you asking me?
For one, I start to consider gimmicks too much when I literally can't wrap my head around it by just reading it. Playing SWTOR, my first character was a Jedi Shadow and there were like 3-4 'things' you could put in a build with a whole bunch of talents that might add to them in such convoluted ways, it thoroughly confused me until I just gave up and played. I just learned as I unlocked the skills instead, learning what the gimmicks did and prioritize them as I experienced them. All in all, the more 'logical' you make a gimmick, the less you have to try to 'get' it and the more 'natural' it feels to play.
I couldn't say which sets I prefer. If I tried, I'd end up thinking about the character I used said set with which doesn't pertain to the gimmicks themselves. Same goes with the non-gimmick sets.
I can tell you which set I didn't like: Staff.
As a gimmick set, it felt the most underwhelming. It's gimmick didn't feel that natural but it was fun to play. I enjoyed Beam Rifle but I didn't like the concept for the character I made with it. Kinetic Melee was slightly underwhelming as far as gimmicks but it was a fun set and very effective not to mention it had its own small 'gimmick' with Stalkers. I didn't care much about Street Justice if only because the animations weren't my taste (they weren't bad, but I'm a fan of over-the-top). Dual Pistols was very fun to build a character around but underwhelming gimmick. Titan Weapons was a blast because it gave new light to an old concept character of mine, adding a new dimension to him...and TW was just great in effects, sounds, feel and effectiveness.
I enjoyed Dual Blades. I was a strong proponent of changing the combos so they were unique on each AT to make them more unique. I really enjoyed my DB Stalker and my DB Brute was just a massacre. But again, the combos should have been more different and they tied too many combos to Build Up on Stalkers, limiting their combo-ability.
On a side-note, of all the ATs I'd have to say my favorites were Stalker and Dominator (before all the IO perma-dom shenanigans). Likely it was because both had a sort of 'gimmick' to game during combat, making the encounters feel like chess matches. I didn't get the same vibe from standard ATs like Scrapper or Defender because their specialty was more random or circumstantial, not something I could leverage to tip the scales.
Ok, the original description sounded more along the lines of CO's block mechanic which is something we won't be doing.
I stated under the mez that we dislike binary systems. We won't be doing a "all or nothing" approach to all types of protection mechanics.
Buffs are possible, but we will be avoiding reaction-timed necessary blocking buffs. Again, we are avoiding all or nothing systems if we can avoid it.
Walls are a possibility with the engine but there are a couple of things we have to make sure work right in order to use them and while if something like this were in the game, its more of a timed-barrier than necessarily one used in very short duration requiring reaction-timing to utilize generally.
Attacks being used as triggers for buffs are cetainly possible, again we are avoiding binary systems, and reactionary based buffs that end up with all or nothing results.
All I can say here is UE4 is much more versatile than the Cryptic engine of old.
For that you will have to wait until we release details on power sets.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
I've two things to throw into the mix.
One, as a fan of the Regeneration set (which I may have mentioned once or twice, already), I'm a fan of [url=http://wowpedia.org/Active_Mitigation]active mitigation[/url] tools. Basically, you hit a power and it provides a certain benefit for a limited time (e.g. [url=http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Regeneration#Reconstruction]Reconstruction[/url]).
Two, realize that [url=http://cityoftitans.com/content/when-fist-meets-face-momentum]Momentum[/url] is liable to be a huge curve ball, for this kind of discussion, and nearly all we know about it is that it's on the drawing board.
- - - - -
[font=Pristina][size=18][b]Hail Beard![/b][/size][/font]
Support [url=http://cityoftitans.com/comment/52149#comment-52149]trap clowns[/url] for CoT!
I'd just like to add that one person's limitation is another's design feature. Some combat elements were not in CoX and not planned for in CoT (as far as I have seen) intentionally to make the combat casual-friendly.
Spurn all ye kindle.
And I'd say that's a foolish design decision.
While I can understand players wanting CoX reincarnated, it's bloody foolish to accept its limitations as well. Not to sound like a dour danny, but if the playerbase backing the project is too minimal to support expanding the project further or the playerbase you do attract wants more and certain features, why, as supporters of the game, deny possible future avenues of expansion of the games' mechanics? Even if you or that other guy posting on the forum here don't care for a certain feature, whose to say the majority of the future audience won't enjoy those features?
I can also understand if budget constraints cap what the devs can accomplish, but it's bloody foolhardy to write off possibilities solely due to preference or your playstyle.
Are any of these things for RPing?
What about Emotes? Block Emote to the rescue! ;)
Or... what if there was a way to implement/change the animations when a foe tries to hit but Misses you.
You could change the Auto-Dodge animation to an alternate one that looks like s/he is raising a shield (or some other Block type animation). :)
And now.. you dont have to constantly be holding a Block button like CO has..
..and still feel like you're Blocking. It's just Auto-Blocking. ;)
Of course, the Block animation(s) will only show if you are idle, and havent Queued up another power yet. :/
Placing limitations isn't necessarily foolish design either. There are times where any creative endeavor can be more creative due to the use of limitations. Piet Mondrian is an excellent example of how placing limits can lead to creative art.
Since the beginning there have been statements made to the effect that we aimed to create the feel of how CoX was played. There has been a stringent commitment to not include any twitch-play mechanics in this game despite that there are people who desire and even favor that type of play over tab targeting and stat driven offense and defense.
This doesn't mean we are copying every aspect of the old game's mechanics either. I've stated elsewhere that we have evaluated what worked and what didn't, how it played and how we can fix what didn't work and improve upon what did. As a result the goal is a game that has new features but feels familiar to that other game.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
Well you're talking about art. Completely different from games (someone else can start a whole debate about that later).
There are entire styles of art dedicated to minimalist approaches. Games seeking to be art might do something similar, but that wasn't stated to be CoT's approach. I doubt you're going to make an MMO looking like some downloadable indie game, are you?
Right, my above reply was to another poster, but the sentiment was general.
Looking over what I say in my OP, I'd like to clarify that what I implore you to strive for is *not* to code yourselves into a box. I don't really want to hear that some time in the future, that your lunge attacks can only hit a target and stop because of coding reasons. That shouldn't be the case if you guys planned for it. Same thing with blocking mechanics; don't want to hear you're avoiding 'twich' mechanics, I'd just like to know if it could be done. And if for whatever reason in the future your audience steers your game in unintended ways, and they desire such a mechanic for a combat power, are you going to state coding problems, balance issues or just that you just don't like it in your game despite how well it could fit in the game? Don't answer that question, but each answer, while acceptable will have backlash, and the last one sounds like something good ol' Statesman would have pushed out back in the way-back days of CoH's youth.
And what would Shield Defense be if you couldn't shield crap that's behind you? I took CoX's SD powerset with a huge grain of salt. It was disenheartening that not only could you not throw the shield, but you couldn't block with it either. It was merely an accessory strapped to your character's arm.
Good clean code is or should be desired by any coder and one ofnour goals is all design is modular sonwe can build up and out over time.
UE 4 provides plenty of tools to support this but on thing off designing any complex system is that it becomes complex. One multiple sub systems interact to create a whole any change to one sub system can have effecte on others.
Another thing about complex systems is there are things which cannot be foreseen and only become prevalent when there are thousands of people interacting with it.
Are the things you brought up possible, certainly. Will a reactive mechanic that precents all damage appear in the game? Its certainly not in our list of design features. Not to say never but it fundamentally moves away from the basic functions of our game play and mechanics.
The example of putting the shield on your back I assume you to mean that it would provide better defense from behind?
Or that the character holding the shield stop all damge if the shield itslef was hit, This isnt a realistic combat simulator where there is an attempt to "aim for the person but they maneuver a shield to stop the attack". Or is the shield on the left side or left side is there more protection dependonf where they attack is directed from vs the position of the character holding the shield. This would lead to constant player reactive positioning for appropriate protection and as ive stated we wont be designing the game on a fundamental level to be played that way.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
One thing you need to realize Leo is that people have different opinions and views about things than you do. I'm not saying that your opinion or view is wrong, it's just different. For example, I LOVED Dual Pistols. It was one of my most favorite sets to play. I did not feel like it was underwhelming at all. You obviously did. You like Twitch mechanics. I do not. For you to state that CoX's combat mechanics were limited and it would be bloody foolish to imitate is your opinion. Not mine. Perhaps you are right about future players. Perhaps you are not. I don't have a crystal ball to look into the future and see that answer. So for you to say that is bloody foolish, in my opinion. Also, if that does ever come around to fruition, there is always the chance that we can have a CoT 2.0 that would be able to use Twitch Mechanics sometime down the road. For now, CoT is attempting to get something off the ground that is similar in design to a game many people loved to play and were very upset to lose. Let's focus on that first. Then a few years down the road perhaps things will be modified to suit the more modern play style of the time it represents.
I got chills! They're multiplyin'. And I'm losin' control. Cuz the power, I'm supplyin'. Why it's ELECTRIFYIN'!!
Then it only comes to if certain things can properly fit within the game's play without feeling completely out of line compared to the rest of the game. And honestly, it doesn't have to even be 'blocking' that the mechanic is only used for. Think about how the attacks would have to work in order to *be* blocked. Like mentioned, it might require the damage to be calculated upon impact rather than after its animation occurs. If you give me time, I could think of other possible applications not involving an "all or nothing" protection clause, whatever it being not easily replicable with the standard CoX form of calculating damage.
I just meant the practical application of a shield as an object, i.e. a power that you could use to block an attack with and defend whatever is standing behind it. You don't have to make a real-world simulation of armored trajectory as it hangs from your arm, a simple "bring up shield = stop/weaken some attack" but the only power in Shield Defense that treated the set as an object was Shield Charge which did so in a slightly impractical way (creates a big AoE at target location). Everything else would have been no different if you had a slab of steel on your arm or not. That would be akin to making the katana set with punches, kicks and a damage aura with 1 attack actually swinging the katana.
I wish people would stop with this. It's grating and distracts from the point considering I'm *not* asking for 'twitch' mechanics, simply suggesting the devs to keep an open mind when recapturing CoX, especially considering how old CoX is now and the release period CoT is likely slated for. Things change, audiences change and expectations change. I'm not saying be like everyone else, but don't box yourself in just because you think everyone wants something a certain way when really you're only getting a small sample of subjective feedback.
Also, I'm not realizing other people have different viewpoints and opinions!? You do realize you're not only generalizing my point but also plugging your ears and listening to nostalgia instead of preparing for possible bumps in the road. The last thing we need is to be forced to make CoT 2.0 to split the audience down the middle or worse, be too little too late if a competitor superhero MMO hits off better. You should look into how various mechanics can fit into your game as seamlessly as possible. The game is obviously very early in its development, so that is perfect time to plan ahead. Contingency is wasted if you wait for mishaps to happen to make them, but the cool thing about contingency plans is you often times don't ever have to use them.
I can't get into how and why of our protection mechanics, suffice to say we have both captured what was done in that other game, have addressed some of the issues they had, and moved forward from what was. What won't be seen is a power that consistanrly results in no damage taken, or relies on reactive based activation to reduce damage to zero.
Emphasis mine. Welcome to what is possible with our concept of aesthetic decoupling and why certain sets have to be designed with set effects to set them apart other than how the set looks.
Its been said before but bears repeating, we hope to bring out what worked I well in that other game, fix what what didn't and move forward while capturing the same basic feel,for how the game played. This means the base design will not be designed around game play reliant upon active aiming, reactive movement or activation any more than the other game did,
And we have completed pre-development and are now working on the transition period from pre-development into asset design. Our resident math guru has run simulations on basic combat systems, worked up our initial power design system, and more. At this point we aren't looking at going backward or redesigning unless simulations show something blatantly not working right that can't be adjusted, or most likely what won't show up until we prototype. We are very much aware of not designing systems that can't be adjusted, designing them for what we need to do now, and what we want to do in the future.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
Can i make a Pregnant Male Character like this? [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vcn6QhLNLVg]Video[/url] ;D
Man, i sure hope the Unreal 4 Editor UI allows for non-techy MWM personnel to come in and adjust / tweak AI (or other) elements using scene handles like [url=http://youtu.be/tWp_ccm0k6U?t=1m53s]THIS[/url]. :)
I think an assumption that is often lurking below the surface of these types of conversations in some people's minds is that the future of MMORPG's is the inevitable merger between MMORPG's and action games. If you look at recent attempts to do this, this doesn't actually seem to be the case.
I personally think attempts to do this often lead to a forced and incongruous result. While some people play both MMORPG's and FPS (my son and I get together and play CoD Zombie mode for fun once in a while--I have no difficulties with reactive mechanics), they don't play both for the same reason or with the same expectations.
There are many different types of games, and they are not all moving towards a great "gaming singularity". Each fills a different need. My wife plays card games online--for which there is a HUGE playerbase--and she doesn't wish there were a reticle (that's just an absurdist joke, not an arguing point. Though sometimes she does sound like she wishes she could blow up the person she's playing).
I can UNDERSTAND the impulse to create a game that merges niches and so captures a larger segment of the gaming market, but I don't think that's probably ever going to really happen between MMORPG's and action gaming.
I guess it is a continuum rather than a binary situation. There is room for every shade of grey between FPS and traditional MMORPG. But I don't think any of those shades is going to substantially replace either--at least not any time soon.
FIGHT EVIL! (or go cause trouble so the Heroes have something to do.)
Couldn't have said it better myself, Empyrean!
Spurn all ye kindle.