a quick fix to both combat and weaponcrafting

[Grasthard]

in other threads, I mentioned I wouldn't comment much on combat system, being a noob and playing with very high ping (>250ms).

However, by testing more the combat, there are some issues which I feel are quite relevant, if even a noob like me can pick those up.

the 2 main issues I have with the new combat (and their possible fixes) are:

- wide parry arcs: pretty self-explanatory. something feels not right when people can still parry you, even when you manouver all the way behind them and hit them in their back (in the futile effort or trying to prevent the 10th parry in a row, more on that below).
solution: decrease the parry arc, maybe to 150-180 degree angle in front of the player.

- parry-turtling and fast weapons: these are 2 issues that go hand-in-hand, which unfortunately not only make the combat problematic, but also make weapon crafting extremely dull with a lot of unviable options. In the current system, it feels way too easy to just sit there and parry non-stop. expecially with a standars Spw/ironsilk-handle weapon which barely consumes any stamina. The current system really penalizes heavier weapons, which offer no advantage except maybe slightly higher damage, in the rare occurrence you manage to land a hit through their highly-telegraphed and slow-release attacks which can be easily parried (think for instance 2h axes and 2h maces).
I think the main issue here is not the slow combat per se, but the parry mechanic. In MO1, the parry (and counter) was introduced to reward fast reflexes when the combat was sped up after release. you time a good directional parry = you are rewarded with a full damage reduction (the key problem here in MO2 imo) and a counterattack. However, this mechanic becomes quite problematic in MO2, with the combat slowed down (for very legitimate reasons), in which every hit can be parried so easily and not just blocked, but perfect parried 100% of times.
possible solution: without slowing donw the combat, rework the parry mechanic in 2 ways could fix this problem for good:
1) remove the "perfect parry" ( and potentially the counterattack as well) or greatly reduce the timing window to get it (though the second option could again make combat "skill" ping-dependant). make the directional "block" reduce the incoming damage without nullifying it to 0 automatically, and
2) make the damage reduction of a directional "block" dependant on weapon weight: the heavier the hitting weapon, the more damage can get through a parry, and vice-versa
quick examples with 100% fictional numbers:
player A attacks B with a weapon of the same weight, player B succesfully parries and reduces 50% of the damage of a regular hit.
player A attacks B with a weapon of twice the weight of player B's weapon, player B succesfully parries and reduces only 25% of the incoming damage.
player A attacks B with a weapon of thrice the weight of player B's weapon, player B succesfully parries and reduces only 15% of the incoming damage.
player A attacks B with a weapon of half the weight of player B's weapon, player B succesfully parries and reduces 75% of the incoming damage.

In this way, parry-turtling would simply not be possible anymore, and heavier weapons will gain back a tactical spot in foot fighting (and not only secluded to mounted fight). Heavier weapons would trade higher stamina cost (a huge cost in MO pvp) for an extra bit of chip damage, whereas lighter weapons would still bethe to-go choice for regular and faster playstyle. if heavier weapons can be meta, means 90% of the weapon crafting recipes won't be useless anymore.

please do post your criticisms to this ideas, as i have to admit these suggestion come mostly from a crafing point of view, rather than a strictly competitive pvp one.

 

[Dayde]

I like this idea. I especially like the idea of weapon weights determining the amount of damage a parry can block. Not only does it provide the pros you mentioned, but it also just feels more realistic. I imagine Wesley from The Princess Bride with his thin rapier parrying someone with a 2h double edged axe in the current system.. just doesn't make sense.

 

[Grasthard]

I like this idea. I especially like the idea of weapon weights determining the amount of damage a parry can block. Not only does it provide the pros you mentioned, but it also just feels more realistic. I imagine Wesley from The Princess Bride with his thin rapier parrying someone with a 2h double edged axe in the current system.. just doesn't make sense.

ye I agree, and I think it would fit more a slower combat without being stale (ie perma parry)

 

[Rorry]

Sorry, no. The problem is, in the real game, mounted combat becomes too OP when damage goes through a block.

 

[ThaBadMan]

Lots of good things here, arcs is a big one when the game is this defensive based.

One thing I dont like is parries not blocking out all damage since this will make the game highly number based since blocking out all damage is one of the bread and butters of outnumbered plays.
If you continually lose HP because of game mechanics you wont ever be able to beat more numbers without a pocket healer. Especially with the snail combat pace since you cant outmaneuver players any more.

 

[ThaBadMan]

Sorry, no. The problem is, in the real game, mounted combat becomes too OP when damage goes through a block.

Yes thats after all the most complained about thing regarding magic, no way to block dmg consistently. You only have a crappy Psy RNG based reduction to decrease a guarranteed dmg hit once its tab hit. And with the slow snail combat and speeds, magic will be easier than ever.
Mages also dont use stamina except when running, so unless speed is increased magic based players will again be king until mounteds come for them, unless mounted mages is a thing in MO2 aswell.

 

[CHUBBS90]

Yeah, i think the pros will have a huge problem with not being able to parry damage, it just means that any 1v2 is probably unwinnable, if the two players just spam attacks as fast as possible. I loved seeing videos of 1 man holding his own against a bunch of others with less skill - that is something to strive for.

I'm guessing the combat is slow to level the playing field for single server game people with 10ms-300ms ping. hence why the timing is large. I guess they could fine tune it to be dependent on what the client sees?
Their FAQ says they give a perfect parry within the first 2 seconds of your block.
Not sure if this is exactly how it works but, say player Alice has 10ms and Bob has 300ms.
Alice swings at bob, +10ms to send to server + 300ms to send to bob +
Bob sees alice swing 310ms after alice has actually clicked.
(if you have 2000ms to react from here, then maybe that can be reduced)
Bob takes 500ms to react and clicks to parry, 500ms reaction + 300ms to send to server
Server reads bob parried 310ms + 500ms + 300ms = 1110ms after Alice initial attack
Alice sees bob parry 1120ms after the initial attack. Note if Alice also had 250ms ping, then Alice would see bob parry 1600ms after Alice attacked.

I'd imagine what you could do is start a client side timer for Bob, 310ms after Alice swings i.e. when bob see's the swing.
that says if bob parrys within 2000ms it will be a parry, otherwise it will be a block. If this is the case, then their probably is some room to reduce the parry window down to like 1500ms or maybe less. Idk if this is how they do it currently or how that works with anticheat.


As a complete noob (about an hour playtime) with combat I don't hate it and still let attacks through because I'm retarded.

But don't get rid of perfect parry.

 

[Handsome Young Man]

Just to contribute to the conversation of chip damage, chip damage being damage that goes through a parry, weapons that have primary damage in cut / stab should never chip, weapons with cut / blunt (Like in MO1, a swelled blade. Or an axe) should chip, stab / anything should never chip, and blunt / anything should chip.

With the charging system, I think to reach the chipping damage you should have to fully charge your strike; and the highest you should ever chip for is 15.

Chip damage should start out small from 3-5 damage and scale up based on strength requirement / weight.

Warhammers should not chip considering their fast speed / light weight.

And just to prevent the stupidity of MO1, the later change of weapon weight should carry over to MO2 mounteds. You shouldn't be using super heavy weapons on mounteds, and I don't think any damage should chip through when swinging off horseback.

I know some people who are unfamiliar with MO1 mounted play, but mounteds were highly mobile, high damage, and extremely tanky. They could also hit you even if you parried and do anywhere from 15 to 25 damage (and more sometimes). Making parrying them a futile play especially in a large fight.

 

[Eldrath]

And just to prevent the stupidity of MO1, the later change of weapon weight should carry over to MO2 mounteds. You shouldn't be using super heavy weapons on mounteds, and I don't think any damage should chip through when swinging off horseback.

I know some people who are unfamiliar with MO1 mounted play, but mounteds were highly mobile, high damage, and extremely tanky. They could also hit you even if you parried and do anywhere from 15 to 25 damage (and more sometimes). Making parrying them a futile play especially in a large fight.

Just to comment on this bit:
It does rely on mounts staying as they were after the mount patch in MO1. SV has stated that they want to change it, but obviously they have not settled on anything since the system seems to be in the design stage. Which makes it even more important to not accept that it might end up as broken as it was.

Personally I feel mounts should die fast but provide mobility and high damage for MCs. Everytime you go in you should be afraid and be on the top of your game, but if you pull it off it feels great. In that scenario chip damage would be okay, otherwise I think it´s shit. (see below)

There should be light and heavy cavalry types as well. We never really had those kind of trade offs before but I think they will add something to mounted play.

----

As for the suggestions:
Arc should be dialed down and tested. You could probably loose another 20° on each side IMO.

Not a fan of chip damage, since it will be another thing that make fighting outnumbered harder. If you are the outnumbered one you will never have the stamina do use chip damage in a meaningful way, while your enemies can happily take turns in fucking you up through your parries.

We need more ways to outplay bigger groups of less skilled players, not tools for them to beat you into submission,.

 

[Rorry]

From what someone said in another thread, reducing parry arc may not fix the problem of people parrying when you hit them in the back because the actual issue is in the animation. They may need to find some other fix for that.

 

[ElPerro]

Just to comment on this bit:
It does rely on mounts staying as they were after the mount patch in MO1. SV has stated that they want to change it, but obviously they have not settled on anything since the system seems to be in the design stage. Which makes it even more important to not accept that it might end up as broken as it was.

Personally I feel mounts should die fast but provide mobility and high damage for MCs. Everytime you go in you should be afraid and be on the top of your game, but if you pull it off it feels great. In that scenario chip damage would be okay, otherwise I think it´s shit. (see below)

There should be light and heavy cavalry types as well. We never really had those kind of trade offs before but I think they will add something to mounted play.

----

As for the suggestions:
Arc should be dialed down and tested. You could probably loose another 20° on each side IMO.

Not a fan of chip damage, since it will be another thing that make fighting outnumbered harder. If you are the outnumbered one you will never have the stamina do use chip damage in a meaningful way, while your enemies can happily take turns in fucking you up through your parries.

We need more ways to outplay bigger groups of less skilled players, not tools for them to beat you into submission,.

Not a fan of chipped dmg either, I guess a little bit is ok (10 max?) but from very heavy weapons that you cant spam (not like warhammers from mo1 pls). And only if you cant use this heavy weapons on horseback.

Maybe a better idea is stamina dmg from heavy weapons only.

 

[Eldrath]

Not a fan of chipped dmg either, I guess a little bit is ok (10 max?) but from very heavy weapons that you cant spam (not like warhammers from mo1 pls). And only if you cant use this heavy weapons on horseback.

Maybe a better idea is stamina dmg from heavy weapons only.

Yep, like Rhodri suggested.

Btw is stamina damage only taken when someone hits you in the lower body hitzone? Vadda is empty so I cant test it.

 

[ElPerro]

Yep, like Rhodri suggested.

Btw is stamina damage only taken when someone hits you in the lower body hitzone? Vadda is empty so I cant test it.

No idea, cant login atm to test. I think its for any hitbox tho

 

[ThaBadMan]

From what someone said in another thread, reducing parry arc may not fix the problem of people parrying when you hit them in the back because the actual issue is in the animation. They may need to find some other fix for that.

Very true but the lower the arc is the easier it will be to get dmg through and the harder blocking will be. In MO at a stage you could look at the player but not the swing it would go through slithly to the side closer to the weapon and you got perfect block.
Must be said that combat was generally faster all around so was alittle easier to smash it through with some confusing movements.

Certainly a step in the right direction. The more the better but even alittle is better then nothing.

 

[Ministro]

"We need more ways to outplay bigger groups of less skilled players, not tools for them to beat you into submission."
-Eldrath

Typical veteran-privilege bullshit right here. One guy fending off a crowd of guys is TV-movie wish fulfillment, not combat realism.

Chip damage is a good idea, if minimal, like small percentage goin thru and only if a large weapon weight disparity. Blocking a two-handed axe with a dagger *should* hurt.

 

[Kaemik]

If this system went live it would be cool to see mounted attacks made parryable, a weight bonus given to weapons used while mounted, some kind of major penalty given to weapons that weight too much, and lances being made immune to parry / heavy weapon penalty entirely.

Then you'd see lances dominate charge and go builds while things and 1h swords and the like would be more dominant on builds meant to stay and fight. If the penalty is stiff enough for heavy weapons they'd fall out of popularity which is good because I don't think there is any historical basis for huge hammer being dominant mounted weapons. Especially over lances which were a super popular weapon for mounted combatants from Mongolia to Britain. I imagine swinging a giant hammer from horseback would damn near throw you out of your saddle unless you're a very strong guy on a very strong horse.

Also, Mortal Online had the second-best mounted combat build I have ever played. Every MMO and games in general mounted combat feels consistently bad. All except the one game better than MO. Conan Exiles. If the devs haven't tried mounted combat in that game they need to. It felt so natural, intuitive, and effective in that game. I literally bought the game 100% because of how fun the mounted combat was and no other reason. Lances and pikes allowed you to be a big-hitting charge like in MO but also one-handed swords turned a mounted combatant into a blender of death easily able to dispatch unguarded archers or infantry poorly suited for fighting a mounted combatant.

A system like that with some solid mount counters such as giving huge anti-mount bonuses to certain polearms would be hella fun.

 

[Ministro]

Some polearms were designed to specifically dismount MC's (billhooks? I always confuse my halberd/glaive-guisarme/etc) Mounteds, esp. with lances, have a huge advantage. The possibility of forced dismount, which they won't be optimized for, would be a good game balancer. Greater reward being mounted, greater risk, getting dismounted.

A working Spear Stance, would not go unappreciated.....

 

[Kaemik]

Some polearms were designed to specifically dismount MC's (billhooks? I always confuse my halberd/glaive-guisarme/etc) Mounteds, esp. with lances, have a huge advantage. The possibility of forced dismount, which they won't be optimized for, would be a good game balancer. Greater reward being mounted, greater risk, getting dismounted.

A working Spear Stance, would not go unappreciated.....

Right. I might do something like if you hit 0 stam (the mount's stam) on mount and then take damage you get thrown (It works that way in Conan Exiles too) certain polearms with a specific primary skill do huge extra stam damage to mounted combatants and one-shot their stam / auto-throw them if you hit them with a brace attack.

Now if this weapon is super good against foot fighters too literally everyone will run it but if it's meh alright against infantry and super amazeballs vs. mounts then it presents an effective counter without making mounted melee inherently underpowered.

Cav archers and cav mages are a whole different story of course as if you practice parthian tactics (Firing backward while riding forward) you automatically win against all melee only infantry. The counter to cav archers is generally foot archers who have the distinct advantage of not having to worry about moving and shooting at the same time or a giant animal that's easy to hit underneath them.

 

[Rorry]

"We need more ways to outplay bigger groups of less skilled players, not tools for them to beat you into submission."
-Eldrath

Typical veteran-privilege bullshit right here. One guy fending off a crowd of guys is TV-movie wish fulfillment, not combat realism.

Chip damage is a good idea, if minimal, like small percentage goin thru and only if a large weapon weight disparity. Blocking a two-handed axe with a dagger *should* hurt.

Player skill is supposed to and MUST matter. Hitting for damage through a skillfully placed block is the opposite, and makes mounteds too powerful. Veterans have already experienced this in game, it sucked.

Realism is not a good argument. (Tired of typing this already, everyone give it up!)

If they use the systems from MO1, there are already ways to dismount mounteds, but I hope rather that they will make mounts slower and weaker (like in the beginning of MO1) so any weapon can be used to kill them (because of lower HP and slower reactions/speeds) and then they can be rid of the dismount mechanics which have never been satisfactory outside of a medium to large group fight.

 

[Eldrath]

"We need more ways to outplay bigger groups of less skilled players, not tools for them to beat you into submission."
-Eldrath

Typical veteran-privilege bullshit right here. One guy fending off a crowd of guys is TV-movie wish fulfillment, not combat realism.

Chip damage is a good idea, if minimal, like small percentage goin thru and only if a large weapon weight disparity. Blocking a two-handed axe with a dagger *should* hurt.

Yeah, I don´t give a shit about what you perceive as "combat realism" because you have no idea what that actually means.

I care about having mechanics that work well and create fun and enganging combat with a high skill ceiling.

Because that actually gives noobs like you the ability to eventually outplay a veteran like me. You are welcome.