Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Innovation - Adaptive Combat Mechanics
Eronakis
Member UncommonPosts: 2,249
I really believe to enhance PVE combat experience is to have adaptive combat mechanics that compliment an adaptive AI. PVE combat is becoming mundane and tedious and I think I have an interesting idea to solve this. Below is a synopsys of adaptive melee combat. It ties in with the game design project I am designing. I think this is a good example to best describe what I am talking about.
***the extended version is down, if you want to discuss it send me a PM**
Motivation
Throughout the course of MMORPG’s, gameplay for melee combat has often been mundane and bland with the use of auto attack. There are two titles that had intentions of improving melee combat mechanics but their implementations did not deliver.
Age of Conan’s philosophy for melee combat is to immerse your self as a real swordsman by allowing the player to freely select any type of directional swing. While in swordplay each directional swing does not have form or structure as a well trained sword man would acquire. Essentially, it felt like the controls were all over the place and very uncomfortable for players.
Sword of the New World provoked a wide array of different stances. I am a believer of allowing the player to have access to many different options. This mechanic peak my interest. However, the stances are nothing more than a deterrent for alternating weapons types in combat. Mainly for aesthetic purposes, these stances compartmentalized the use of different abilities for a saved hot-bar set to the weapon you wanted to use.
Solution
I thought merging the stance design with the directional swings to create new melee mechanics would enhance a fun, diverse and challenging experience for players. Researching real swordsmanship would be the key to offer a unique distinct flavor of melee combat.
Swordsmanship is an element of many different options that could be translated into game design for melee combat. The core of swordsmanship is guards (stances). A guard is the offensive and defensive postures and ready positions from which to deliver all manner of blows to the target.
The Guard System combat is based around the use of guards to simulate an immersive experience of real swordsmanship in gameplay. Guards allow a large array of options for the player to experience multiple ways to win a fight. This mechanic also allows the players to adapt freely in battle to offset the opposition. Unlike Age of Conan with directional swings, Guards allow fluidity and organization while in the heat of the battle.
Importance of the Guard System
The Guard System is translated from European Swordsmanship into gameplay. Think about real swordsmanship. Each swing of the blade is crucial as well as parries and ripostes. You have to change your guard countless times to offset the opponent to perform damage. The Guard system allows the player to become a tactician and to know how each guard works in different situational scenarios. These guards allow the player to strategize before and while in combat to have a chance at victory. Guard system allows players to have a distinct player skill level which complements better playability.
The Guard system is the essential mechanic that opens a window for players to react and adapt to the opponent in real time. This system is not strictly for one way of playability but focuses on freely choosing multiple play styles. The players can adapt freely in the heat of the battle to attempt to control the fight by selecting a guard to strike or defend.
Gameplay is not linear as opposed to other combat designs. There are dozens of different paths a player can fight to determine victory. This design still somewhat focuses on the player to still react with the AI by selecting abilities. However, the Guards are a median of the adaptability of a player to the AI interaction.
NPC AI
AI is another aspect to enhance the versatile adaptability in combat. AI is crucial because it has to complement the complexities of the Guard system to give the player a sense of immersed realism. NPC AI will have limitations upon guard use depending on their intellect and/or militaristic training. For an example, a kobold would be limited to the three basic guards whereas an orc may have a wider access of guards dependent on their training.
All NPC’s will have an intellectual hierarchy of many conditions based on their training of the use of guards. The intellectual hierarchy is a deterrent of how well the NPC will adapt in combat with the use of Guard play.
NPC will block and counter spam attacks. Spam is the same attacks that a player uses over and over to win a battle. The Guard system allows a diverse selection of guards to prevent spam.
Pace of Combat
There are many different technical aspects to gauge the pace of combat. However, there are two attributes that I feel would best show the pace of combat for the Guard system: frequency of player input and the duration of battle.
Frequency of player input with using guards is not fast pace because it negates spamming abilities. Reaction time may seem fast in combat, yet the animation plus server lag increases the time delay between button presses. The guard combat system is not turn-based, which is frequently considered a slower paced combat system.
In theory I would consider the pace of combat for the Guard system to be medium pace. Medium pace of combat represents a slower frequency of player input. A slower pace of combat is crucial for the player to see the types of guards, strikes and defensive techniques that the opponent is using. Depending on player strategy determines how fast or slow the duration of battle may consist.
Comments
Kind of how GW2 uses weapon sets and elemental attunements?
Weapon set = Elemental attunement = Guard
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
So.... how does it work?
GW2 weapon swtiching but instead they are stance switching + AoC's direction swings which are different depending on the stance?
Thanks for posting your full game idea. Hopefully when I get to reading it I can understand how it works exactly. I wanted a brief desciption of what it is like. oh well
I actually haven't played GW2 or know that much about it. Can you give me a quick run down on that mechanic or a good place where I can find an explanation?
The problem you have is that you are getting too real. The importance of guards and directional swings in real life involves often instant incapacitation or death once a single hit goes through. I suspect you imagine the ridiculous sort of combat which is displayed in anime or movies and you are wrong if you think that will happen. Most sword fighting in medieval warfare involves one or two swings with danger from many sides and then its over. Part of the point of the hitpoint and damage based system was to make battles last longer and feel more satisfying.
You would spend about the same time respawning and dying as players in FPS games if you attempted to get pseudo faux not at all real real sword fighting in games. Boss battles would not at all be similar to current ones and you would literally be forced to zerg giant ass dragons and die oodles of times.
I think this is a huge case of people not understanding what they are asking for and thinking they are asking for something that isn't going to happen. Further the real swordfighting system is based on all sorts of visual and audio cues that we simply can't simulate in a videogame.
You're assuming a lot here with very little information about the combat mechanics. I just breached the surface of what it is. It was intended to show how combat mechanics can become very adaptive.
I will give you the fact that you're confused that directional swings like age of conan will be by player input. I wasn't clear on that. No, this system does not focus on direction swings. The directional swings are from the type of Guard you're in. There are 3 core guards. High, Middle and Low. Each guard has an advantage and disadvantage in a parry or an offensive strike. I am focusing on the guard's that real swordmanship has to offer. It's strategy within the guards. Of course there are variations and specialities within that three guard structure.
No I don't imagine anime animation for combat, far from it. I have actually studied swordmanship and I translated it into combat mechanics the best I can. I have 18 more pages worth of stuff explaining the mechanics. When you translate real life attributes into game design, you make it a game. I am not trying to have a direct simulation.
Can you point to where I said there won't be HP or damage? I never said there wasn't going to be that. There will absolutelty be hit points and damage.
I know what I am asking for. This system can work in real time and in turned baseded gameplay. This is not intended for twitch combat. I would say it's close to the fluidity of movement within GW2. The difference is the placement of your weapon and how you attack with it. There will still be a hot bar.
The sequence in which a player would do in combat. --- Choose Guard, High, Middle or Low ---> Then chose ability. The animation starts for damage when you choose your ability. And before you say it's going to get repetivite, each guard has a threshold of how many abilities you can use within that guard.
I am not going to type a book out explaining it in full detail. First, this idea is a theory. This is what happens before it's implemented in a demo for testing. And next time before you go off on a rant of assumptions that you have no idea how I designed this, ask questions first before saying this will or won't work.
The idea is not FPS at all.. there is a targeting system.. maybe I should just post the whole 18 page document.. but who would really read it? I have thought about all of this. It's inside that document. I do know what I am talking about. I think it's a great theory. Again game design theory. Has it been implimented yet for testing and balancing? Nope. I want to see it if it works and I am confident it will with a lot of tweeking
Until you get into specifics we can't really know what you are saying. Its hardly our fault.
18 pages is like 9 minutes of reading. Its nothing. Just because you have a little document doesn't mean what you suggest will work.
I am not here to argue with you. Again I think it will work, but will it? I don't really know and you don't really know, because it hasn't been tested yet. Please understand that.
Honestly, I think Tera is the best MMO combat out there right now and is a good example to use. The game itself may get boring due to leveling curve but the combat system is truely astonishing.
Played-Everything
Playing-LoL
I am a believer of allowing the player to have access to many different options. This mechanic peak my interest.
Thank you for seeing what I was trying to convey. This mechanic provides a vast array of options for a player. I am considering of posting my document... for a short time...
Ok, MMO-Action-y. Doesn't change the point I was trying to make. Post the document if you want.
Are you going to make this game or something?
9 months ago I was very serious about it. Now, it's just for fun. I will need a good animator and a programmer to make this demo. A biped rig could work too.. doesn't have to be skinned. But yeah I'll post it in the OP...soon...
I don't know if the sun will come up tomorrow either, but that is a meaningless argument. I am only trying to help you, but you can of course do what you want. I see you won't be swayed but luckily all I have to do to prove my point is wait.
Although, to prove it you have to make a demo. Do you have programming skills?
The guard sytem does appear to be very similar to the design that Guild Wars 2 is using. It's not the same, but similar.
Bascially, you can switch weapons which will swap out different skills. These are your stances. In this way you adapt to the situation.
In Guild Wars 2, you basically can only choose to swap out 2 weapon sets at a time. You have to decide which two weapon sets you would like most. But most of the classes can choose from a prettylarge combination of those weapons.
It sounds like in your game, you would have these guards, likely far more than 2, and your skills would switch based on you changing these guards. You would have far more adaptability overall. You would also keep combat slow so it is a bit more strategy based for the users that are less talented at adapating quickly. It honestly sounds like a fun system.
No, I do not. 6-9 months ago, I didn't want to learn. But I have the jest of it how it could work in theory. I've only messed with post script, using if then and case statements. Other than that I am not as acquaint as I'd like to be. Don't have the time to sit down and learn it.
I will answer in blue.
I feel like this needs to be said, even though it ought to be obvious: good PvE needs to have a "correct" strategy, and people using the correct strategy need to be rewarded with substantially superior results.
This is what makes me bewildered that you think this isn't a straight-up simulation. In a simulation, it's fun to watch how all the different combinations could play out, and that's what you're presenting to us. In your combat example, the player approaches an orc in Middle Guard, and you explain how there's an advantage to using any of the three available guards, making it largely a matter of which strategy the player prefers. If there's no obviously fantastic or horrible choice, there's so much less incentive to understand and master the system. It ends up just being an interesting simulation; you get to see how this weapon in this guard fares against that weapon in that guard with the same pros and cons that would exist in real life.
By constrast, in a game it's fun to solve the puzzle, come up with the right plan, and execute it properly. When you approach an orc in Middle Guard, some of your options should be clearly superior to others in a way that's obvious to someone that understands the basics of the system. Choosing guards at random should result in the worst possible outcome, in much the same way that sending out random Pokemon and having them use random moves would give you a terrible result. From the way it looks now, even without any numbers in it, your design seems to not punish people at all for just choosing a random guard each time the choice comes up.
Disdena, you do bring in good points. I did forget to mention that this document sets the foundation for the mechanic. As you can see it's not finished. You have every reason to believe that this may seem as a simulation. But it's not a simulation. The player actually interacts within swordplay.
"I feel like this needs to be said, even though it ought to be obvious: good PvE needs to have a "correct" strategy, and people using the correct strategy need to be rewarded with substantially superior results."
That is what the traditional system brings to the table. Of course there will be a correct strategy. What I am trying to do is think out side of the box and allow players to have different paths of strategy towards that one result. So many games allow one strategy and everyone follows it. Over a short time, it feels like a job. I am trying to allow a player to have many different options and more freedom within combat. It's a different way to do things. That's what makes us different. I know it may be an unorthadox game design philosophy but it's a risk with any new idea that comes into play.
I'd like to argue that what I have proposed will reward the player within the parameters of combat. You mention that there isn't an incentive to use a guard over another? There are bonuses and penalties in using a guard over another. Vulnerability: A modifier to balance each guard. It determines the how open the target is to receive an offensive strike. It also determines the penalty for damage dealt when in a defensive guard. Vulnerability may also penalize certain aspects of class ability modifiers. This is one example of a penality. However, I did not express what the penalities where within the combat sequence example. I wrote this document a year ago and took a long break. Now looking back, I should and will add more stuff to the document. Expressing the penality more clearer would be one of those things.
Also each one of the three core guards does give an incentive to use over the other. High gives high offense and very low defense, the middle guard gives a balance of both, but not efficient in both, and low gaurd gives high defense and low offense. Each of the three core guards sets a clear distinction of an advantage and disadvantage.
In your last paragraph, you are correct by saying, "choosing guards at random should result in the worst possible outcome", which I absolutely agree with. But there is a penality for that. The offset or an attack of opportunity will be the nessacary penality in which a player will see if they randomly pick guards.
I read through it all, and basically, I have to say I want a system that allows me to pay attention to the flow of combat and know that each orc I fight is not the same as the other orcs. This in turn leads to different strategy and quick thinking in each and every battle.
Of course, if such a system were to exist, then we need to also recognize that killing thousands of creatures over and over would get frustrating. So the game needs to have far less killing and more elements to it that mean something, enabling combat to always stay meaningful.
My blog is a continuing story of what MMO's should be like.