Sword Play

#1 I've been concerned about the melee system since day one of hearing about it... It's hard to make it non-simplistic while still making it feasible.

This will probably be a problematic discussion because this type of system is hard to balance. We're going to be attacking other humans, of course, so we'll have to be smart enough to take that into account with a system like melee. (The attacks will be predictable enough at that range that landing a hit will be relatively difficult with almost any system.)

Combos, IMO, just won't work because other players are too smart to unwittingly allow themselves to be attacked that much.

Rather, I'd propose a simpler system that can be utilized as a combo, if such a case arises.

There are two modes of fire: primary, secondary. Primary is faster but weaker, while secondary is slower, more powerful, but disallows movement while implementing them.

Primary Fire:

Up: Thrust
Left: Left Swing
Right: Right Swing
Down: Parry

Secondary Fire:

Up: Lunging Overhead Swing
Left: Lunging Left Swing
Right: Lunging Right Swing
Down: Stationary Parry

The key difference here is that there is no multiple key implementation for attacking - just simple movements that can be used together. Also, the down key is used for defense, rather than a seperate function. Moving backwards firing sounds more attributed to defense to begin with, and it encourages the use of movement and defense rather than rushing and chopping.

Attacks can be countered by:
A) Parrying with the down key - primary parry can be used while moving and is less accurate, and can sustain slight damage if inaccurate, while secondary parry disallows any damage except from behind, but when used, fixates your player in the direction he's facing for a second
B) Your own attacks - an opponents left swing can be countered with your own right swing. Here, you won't be thinking "He's using a left swing." You'll just see a sword flying at you from his left (your right), and think "Better swing to the right to knock that away." So, you tap the attack button plus the right button, and you block the attack. Thrusts can only be countered with another thrust or parry, obviously.

Myself... I doubt I'll use the melee system, whatever it is, much at all. My reason? I have a 21.6k connection due to bad phone lines, so I imagine while I AM playing well, my responses to attacks won't go through quickly enough, or my hits won't register. This is true with many 56kers. Don't expect to see many vet sub-broadband users using axes unless they're very stable and are only going after mages with limited melee abilities.

#2 I would completely disagree with what you have just said. Many many computer games work on a combo system, including 1 on 1 fighters, like the later street fighters.

I am looking at a number of games, including JK2, for which I think sword fighting is impressive, and many allow you to link sword fighting moves together to create some incredible looking, and effective attacks, it is then down to the individual to make them effective.

You'd also be suprised at just how easy it can be to hit players, I think you are giving them too much credit, take for example JK2 again, a game I am very familar with, the lightsaber deflects all laser shots, everyone knows this, yet you can still get people with a lightsaber to attack you whilst you are powering up a laser shot, which you then shoot into them as they raise their lightsaber to attack, wouldn't your "players are too smart to unwittingly allow themselves to be attacked that much" cover that situation?

Also how does is my system anymore difficult than yours? (I assume your up and down are forwards and backwards), it lets itself be more difficult with the links but at its basic it has eight attacks based on the direction you are travelling. The addition of combos is to add extra depth to a system which would otherwise be pretty boring. Your system is infact at its base almost indentical to mine just slightly different, with 4 less moves as mine would include an attack for strafing left and moving forward, that would be different to moving forward or strafing left.

The bit that may make it look complex is the initiators and terminators, these are simply the bits of the attack that do now damage and either set up the attack or return the player to the ready position. For example your thrust would require under my system and initiator and terminator:

Initator : Draw sword back and lower to parallel with the ground
Attack : Drive sword forwards
Terminator : Return sword to ready position

The idea of splitting an attack into those blocks helps with:
A) Scripting them - As the statemachine will need those as different animations if a potential combo system is implemented, which I think it should be.
B) Linking moves together

Also I would like to avoid the gun principle, which is inherent in your attacks, if you limit the sword, to what is effectively attack, even if there are 3 or 4 attacks, with nothing else added to it melee becomes a boring affair with no depth, if you add the ability to link moves together so they come out faster than if you have to wait to ready up each time suddenly it becomes a potentially complex and highly skillful system. Also very few combat styles rely on just one move, they will rely on a series of moves, whether they be initial feints or missed attacks combos are the most natural thing to use.

Owen

#3 Because people don't stand still and fight one another like in street fighter and JK2. In JK1, sabre fighting was used properly, with people getting as far away as possible, and striking at the correct time.

Believe me, you're not going to see people standing face-to-face, swinging their weapons at one another. If they do, I'll be glad to just strafe to their left for a quick kill. Or, I'll just wander around behind people dueling like this and kill them from behind, then move on.

#4 I would disagree with that. JK did use rush in and out tactics, but running miles away, no, just out of sword range. JK2 doesn't have face-to-face fighting either, there is a lot of weaving around people, when you're fighting someone with some reasonable ability, but the combos help, especially with the more powerful attacks, because you can weave them into a series of strikes that if put together well will strike them each time, and that's even when they are trying to back away.

Just because you want to strike once, back off, look for an opening, run in strike again, doesn't mean that everyone does. I would rather have rapid sword exchanges, maybe 3,4 or even 5 strikes before backing away, small flurries, and this is what the system I suggested would enable, your system would get boring, quickly because it would be run in, strike, take 5 steps back, run in, strike, take 5 steps back. Wouldn't a better system be, first hit knock sword aside, second hit strike, third hit parried, step back, makes in a far more dynamic interesting system.

#5 I would recommend that everyone go download and play the Rune demo sometime soon. It has a very effective melee system and has enjoyed a fair amount of multiplayer success.

#6 86.5MB... ack. I can't handle that on my 21.6k.

To state the obvious, not everyone wants to stand still and perform combos either. If this combo system were enabled, I'd continue using the backaway method because it's the most effective for not taking damage. You may be able to parry, but simply being out of their range takes the expectancy of taking damage down to 0% no matter what.

What I'm getting at is that people are going to be constantly moving during a fight (not just backing away, of course). That means a lot of strafing, backing, charging, etc. To me, standing still, exchanging blows is boring. To others, it may not be. In any case, there are going to be multiple styles of melee people use in-game, and as-now, none of our ideas cover all of them, or at least a majority of them.

I just read a text file about Rune's combat system: http://rune.mindlessgames.com/index.php

Actually, that's the exact system I suggested, except with a slight sort of combo move if you hit the appropriate primary and secondary attacks accordingly.

The most enjoyable melee system I've ever used was in a RPG actually: Zelda 64. In this, you could target an enemy, and your focus would always be on him, no matter where you or your target moved to. This allowed you to enter a sort of "duel" state in which you could not only move, but perform the same kind of combat moves as suggested in the earlier combo suggestion. Tapping the attack button performed a standard swipe. Holding back the control stick and pressing the jump button allowed you to flip backwards, something that could only be done in combat. Jumping while pressing the control stick to the left or right caused you to jump to that position, while still maintaining your focus on the enemy. Pressing the attack button three times successively created a chain attack combo, which could be deadly, but dangerous if your opponent moved in time.

That's the sort of combat system I'd love to have, personally. I've always loved the idea of dueling with swords, but it's not possible because of the pains of trying to line yourself up with your opponent. Fortunately, targetting an opponent and setting your focus on him allows both you and the other player to not only use agility and speed, but power and strategy as well. To me, this is the ideal system.

I raised that idea up earlier in the year, but I remember some people had problems with a targetting system. Why, I'm not sure. I personally loved it, and everyone I know that played the game did as well. It's easy to use yet has the possibility of containing dozens of different combonations and moves, all centered around close combat sword play and movement.

#7 I have to say JK2 has the best implementation of Melee combat that i've seen to date in a FPS game (although Rune is very good too).
One thing that helps JK2 is that defense is automatic, if you're not attacking you automatically attempt to defend against attacks, this makes it more viable for slow connection folks.

A system of combo attacks seems to be a necessity, 3-4 attacks gets very old very quickly (ie. Morrowind)

#8 Obviously you are unfamiliar with JK2, there is no standing still fighting, unless you want to die.

The system i suggested you would always be moving, you would never stand still, standing still would produce a forward attack only. You don't just stand there and hit buttons, when you strafe left you produce a different move. I believe you have misunderstood my system, the attack is determined by the direction you travel not key presses. If you strafe right you would perform a particular attack, a combo system would involve moving you character in a particular series of directions whilst holding the attack button, which would allow aggressive combos, being primarily forward moving moves strung together, defensive, designed at fending off players, being primarily backwards moving ones, and then good mixes containing movement in a number of different directions. It is based on the current motion of the character, not on activating attack then tapping in directions. I can understand your dislike of the system I would be incredibly bored with that.

The only problem I can see with a targetting system is it reduces skill in hitting, the moves automatically home in on one player, additionally it would make it hard when being attacked by a lot of people, which will happen, to fend them off, as unlike in Zelda the average enemy will probably take more than 1 or 2 hits to dispatch. It could be considered, but I'm not sure if it would work for those reasons.

#9 On the subject of defense, I believe parrying should be automatic in a thin cone of view, but also having a block button should extend that area, so there is no ass blocking, as in JK2. It makes sword fighting more viable for people with higher pings.

#10 So perhaps something like this would work:
-Having a weapon equipped gives you a base chance to block/parry incomming attacks in a narrow front arc, based on your class, the weapon used etc.
-Adding a shield increases the chance to block based again on the class and type of shield used.
-A defense button allows you to enter defense-mode that greatly increases the chance you block and the size of the arc. Activating defense mode would probably also slow you down and prevent you from attacking.

#11 Ish. There would be one of two things, you could hit defense and it would give say 1/4 of defense, where you can't attack, but incoming attacks are blocked, or you have to hit it when there is an incoming attack to make it work.

The other possibilty is to have say two stances, defensive and offensive, in defensive most attacks are parryable, but your range of attacks is reduced, as is your repetoire, however in offensive stance, you have a great variety of moves and attacks, as well as additional damage, just your defensive capabilities are reduced.

#12 Toggling between stances sounds workable to me, you could have a third in-between stance thats a compromise between offense and defense, i dun know if its really necessary but it would be good for new players and people who don't want to worry about switching between the more advanced modes.

#13 The main reason why you don't see close up fights in JK2 is that a special collision detection scheme for the GHOUL2 system is disabled in multiplayer, making it much harder to detect swings to block, when the swing was blocked, and when to go back to ready animation or immediately go into another attack.

Next time you play JK2 try firing up a bot server and typing this command into the console:
g_saberghoul2collision 1

Hrm... I think that's the right command, it's something similar.

Has anyone considered a Lock-On feature to help players stay on target?

#14 I had been wondering about that, the SP battles always felt more intense, must explain it.

#15 Quick note... the challenge of a targetting system is that the other person fights back. :D

Both of you are locked on one another, so you'll have a hard time trying to get an attack through.

#16 True the problem is that it is rarely even numbers and you will quite often be fighing either less or more people that your team has there, which means that say you are fighting 4 vs 3, there are 3 vs 3 locked on (in theory) but one team has an extra person that is locked on to someone that isn't locked onto them.

#17 How about making a non-permanent lock?

Something like a player holds down the right mouse button to lock on temporarily, then just lets go to unlock to quickly switch targets? There'd be different moves possible while locked on and not locked on.

This way, you maintain the ability to fight effectively with general attacks, but when you're one on one with someone, you want to make sure you focus on him.

#18 Of course, locks deactivate... The main point of a locking system is to make 1 on 1 scenerios tougher for you. 2 on 1 against you makes it even tougher, as you'll have to unlock and use non-focus attacks or taget one person at a time. Essentially, it's the same thing as every other melee system, except it has an enhancement for 1 on 1 combat. I'd love to see a targetting dueling system involved in this, no matter how much it'd have to be cut down, simply because I love the strategy involved in trying to guess your opponents moves and actions, and avoiding last second hits. :D

In all actuality, spells are going to require targetting as well, so the system is there.

Now I have a question here... if it truly better for auto-defenses to be put up? It seems like that would actually save a lot of people when they're not paying attention. I know it certainly has me in JK. Personally, I like the idea of using a shield or perhaps blocking using swords, if you don't have a shield. That's just me though...

#19 Perhaps some duellng mode, not a default lock on system, but something both players could consent too.

#20 I belive we need to also be reminded that this game will have team play as a factor. In JKII theres a lot of "Just worry about yourself" mentalilty.

I think someone coming up behind you while your fighting should be feesible. Although some may disagree its very realistic.

Also If I am playing CTF and lets say im locked in with another player fighting how easy would it be to protect the person with the flag? You hve weird gmeplay of stopping and locking on to certin players that are going to avoid you and get the flag.

As in JKII I greatly enjoy how the defesnse is automatic. I belive we should do the same with this, and then lets say how much armor and sgility equlas your chanes to deflect a hit. As in DiabloII where depednign upoin your armor and th opponents weapon, determined how hard you got hit. I may be techinicaly wrong on that BUT you get th point.

What I see s feesible is a system where you have the attacking movements of JKII, the utomtic defese of JKII determined by sych factors like DiabloII's armor thingy, and then magic wokring in also the same way UPON the melee'r.