What Do You Think?

[giannis]

Well i did a search and although this is a basic idea i dont think it has been suggested before.

 

OK the vast majority of you have 3 sets of serps, 12 sets of tit longs 8 sets of tit short and a thermal serp. However each time you go to train your attack/defence you go empty handed as if you are a group of Homo Habilis boxers. And the reason is simple. Based on the current system the less damage you do on a monster the more time you can spent fighting with it and thus the more xp you can get. That is all nice and good but it is not very fantasy-rpg like if you don't see any swords in the game but only fist fights.

 

So here's where my suggestion comes in:

 

Lets change the combat system. Instead of each individual sucessful attack and each individual succesful defence giving us some xp to our attack or deffense skill repsectively lets have each sucesful kill give us xp for attack and defense. To clarify this i give an example:

 

You (the Valiant King_fr00b the Second, son of l0rd_suxzorS the third) go to take on a Gob. You are lvl 20/20/20/20

 

You attack it with no weapons and after a long fight you kill it. The moment it dies you get 3000xp 1500 attack and 1500 defence (the numbers are made up).

 

Now you go again to kill the same gob, with the same stats but this time you're armed with a therm-serp. After one blow the gob is Dead. And you are awarded 3000xp again. 1500 attack and 1500 defense. (notice that the xp gained is fixed for that lvl and creature and it does not mater how you killed it... just the fact that you killed it.

 

After killing the gob twice you progress to lvl 67/67/67/67 (with xp like that what did you expect?) Now you go to attack the gob again and this time you get 2xp points 1 attack and 1 defence....

 

Dissapointed on the small xp you got from the gob this time you decided to go for a Fluffy. You park your car at Grubani, go find the meanest looking fluffy and kill it. Since you are only lvl 67/67/67/67 and you managed to kill a fluffy you get 300*10^6 xp and you progress to lvl 1337/1337/1337 and now you can pwn Donpedro,Shasso,and Hera at the same time.

And they lived hapilly ever after.

 

 

Ok enough with stupid fr00b stories and back to the suggestion. By know you should know where i am heading. The amount of Xp each monster gives should be fixed and awarded uppon the monsters death. Each monster should have (and has if i am not mistaken) a lvl. The closer you are to that monster's lvl the less xp you are going to get uppon blowing its arse into smitherines. The further away you are from the monsters lvl the more Xp you should get. Trying to Get extra xp by pressing the <Home> button wont do you any good and you might as well have used your Freaking seprp that is rusting away in storage. It is not necessery for every monster to give an equal ammount of Defence/Attack Xp, but some monster can give more Defense than attack xp and others more attack than Defense xp.

 

I think this won't be that hard to implement, probably 10 more pages of code on the server(including /*comments*/) and a really nice/ballanced/thought out formula which I am sure you math wizards, wont mind creating.

 

Besides guys think about Roja she spent months creating new weapons and what are you going to do? Spend all your money that you made collecting Liliacs to buy those weapons and never use them. Wake up ppl your weapons are molding away in sTorage.

 

And if nor roja's work that will go unseen, nor the broken <Home> button on your keybords,nor the fact that molgor is using your tit axes to chop wood will convince you to change the combat system, maybe poor King_fr00bs dreams to pk Shasso will.

Well that's about it.

 

May the force be with you all.

Edited May 29, 2005 by giannis

[Vanyel]

I like the idea. I think getting much more xp fightting barehanded it's ridiculous and makes weapon rather useless (unless you're ebul pker).

[giannis]

I like the idea. I think getting much more xp fightting barehanded it's ridiculous and makes weapon  rather useless (unless you're ebul pker).

165615[/snapback]

 

my point exactly.

[ttlanhil]

or instead of having it based on your skill levels, have it based on adjusted levels... see #arm for the adjustments. doing it that way would mean you get a slight bonus for fighting unarmed if the critter is easy, but not enough that people wouldn't grab a big sword and go after some tough critter.

 

however, there is a problem, the multi-fight maps, and running from a fight. because of these issues, each sucessful hit/block gets XP rather than a kill, which is easier to code and works better. so instead of making it per kill, just adjust how much is gained per hit/block, similar to how it currently is, but addresses the problem

or even change it so that each HP of a monster has X amount of XP, you get that per HP damage you do (similar sorta thing for defence)... bigger hit = more XP

[duran]

hehe, do some searches and your bound to run into some posts of mine about the exact same topic. and most of the ideas i have posted are the ones your airing now.

 

and i must say i prefer the solution given in ttlanhil's post.

 

for every attack you deliver you get a percentage of the total exp a monster can give based on the amount of damage you do. basicly its a pr kill exp but rather then a all or nothing thing your given it pr hit like today.

 

for defence the system would have to roll the amount of damage done and hand out a exp amount equal to the percentage of damage the monster would have done if it had hurt you. so if you go up against a powerfull monster and is able to dodge like a pro (yes dodge, not saved by armor) then you would see your defence exp increase a lot if you have low hp. but it would be a gamble as a single connected hit may well send you to the underworld...

[Lyanna]

Yes, the main obstacle to overcome is the problem of multi-combat, kill-stealing, and the like. If some newbie jumps in at the last minute in a multi-map and delivers the finishing blow to the goblin, then what?

 

duran's percentage idea works to some extent... but you might end up with people casting Remote Heal on the monster in order to make it last longer (and hence increasing the damage total they do to it).

 

Oh, and how would the experience totals be calculated for PvP fighting?

 

-Lyn-

[ttlanhil]

Yes, the main obstacle to overcome is the problem of multi-combat, kill-stealing, and the like. If some newbie jumps in at the last minute in a multi-map and delivers the finishing blow to the goblin, then what?

yeah, this is where the xp per hit/block really shines

duran's percentage idea works to some extent... but you might end up with people casting Remote Heal on the monster in order to make it last longer (and hence increasing the damage total they do to it).

after spending a bit of time considering this, we could have a healing adjust the XP gained per hit/block, decreasing the amount gained by double the health gained/total health, or something similar

Oh, and how would the experience totals be calculated for PvP fighting?

 

-Lyn-

165654[/snapback]

this could be adjusted similarly as well, with a penalty here (as in, a drop) because people do train PvP, and if you're not fighting to kill, then you're not fighting as hard. those fighting for drops, well, they're not as interested in the XP, so it's not as big an issue there either

[trollson]

Giving experience for just taking the kill has problems of its own (as mentioned above). It shouldn't be necessary to adjust the experience based on the respective levels of character and monster either -- this should be covered by the exponential experience table (high levels require more experience).

 

If the objective here is to encourage more realistic use of weapons, then there are other approaches. For example, I posted a suggestion on weapon specific skills in a previous thread. That approach can be added to the game relatively safely (does not invalidate what has gone before), but would increase effective A/D (limit tends to a doubling), which would require some meaty monsters to face up to!.

Edited May 29, 2005 by trollson

[duran]

lyanna, they can allready do that remote heal to extend fight trick if they feel like it. just remember that it will cost them 2 essences and some etheral points every time they do so, and it will only give the monster 5 more points per spell cast. i would not realy say that its a cost effective way of doing it when you can rather just heal yourself and then find another monster to kill.

 

as for weapon-class sub-skills, i dont know...

 

another thing about precetage of health, one could have a max amount of exp given so that when you have done damage equal to 100% of the monsters health you gain no more exp. so basicly the monsters will have a exp value pr kill in a way but you dont get it all at the end of the fight but rather get it over time while fighting. if you break of fighting early or die you dont get any more exp for that fight

 

and i cant realy comment on the pvp part as i dont know how the current exp values are calculated there...

[Brom]

another thing about precetage of health, one could have a max amount of exp given so that when you have done damage equal to 100% of the monsters health you gain no more exp. so basicly the monsters will have a exp value pr kill in a way but you dont get it all at the end of the fight but rather get it over time while fighting. if you break of fighting early or die you dont get any more exp for that fight

He is right!

 

Note: remote heal can now heal based on level, so I for example can heal sometimes up to 15hp per heal, not just 5

 

2 options I see when it comes to remote heal, the one mentioned above by duran and keeping in mind that there is a cap for exp per fight already in place.

For example, in order for me to get all that a garg is worth for me I need to flee 1-2 times, because the defense exp racks up so fast, however the attack exp comes from dealing damage in this new...idea which would make sure I get a decent amount per garg kill. I like it, can anyone work on it?

[Vanyel]

I like ttlanhil idea, but.... frankly, fighitng with flee button press all the time is at least as silly as barehanded fighting.

I know that avoiding hits should give experience, but there should be limit for that. Couple days ago I heard that somebody got 15k (yes 1.5e4 - 15000) xp fighting garg! just because he found somebody with remote heal spell and good magic level! Sure, someone could say - 'what a great idea!' -but is there in it at least grain of sense? If, it's very little.

To be honest I think that fighting system should be done starting with ttlanhil idea and there should be done something what would make 'flee-fighting' senseless - or at least a way harder.

[ttlanhil]

I like ttlanhil idea, but.... frankly, fighitng with flee button press all the time is at least as silly as barehanded fighting.

I know that avoiding hits should give experience, but there should be limit for that. Couple days ago I heard that somebody got 15k (yes 1.5e4 - 15000) xp fighting garg! just because he found somebody with remote heal spell and good magic level! Sure, someone could say - 'what a great idea!' -but is there in it at least grain of sense? If, it's very little.

To be honest I think that fighting system should be done starting with ttlanhil idea and there should be done something what would make 'flee-fighting' senseless - or at least a way harder.

165944[/snapback]

okay, no XP while trying to run... you're trying to run away, not dodge... problem solved

yes, by suceeding in running, and fighting again, you reset the counter on how many times you can gain XP from a critter, and with remote heal the one critter will last a while... but if you don't get XP when running... it'd be more hassle than just waiting for a respawn anyway

[crannog]

It would be nice if:

 

 

*some fictional numbers to make the point*

 

1. its calcualted that you are a certain lvl (a+d) + w/2 + (p+c) /5 for me i would be (139) + 12 + (60) = 211/5 = 42.2

2. each monster has a certain lvl (for this i will say an ogre = 40)

3. if i attack and kill the ogre i get 100% xp (as i am +/- 5 lvs from ogre)

4. if i attack a fluffy (perhaps he has "lvl" of 60 i get 120% xp (as i am more than 5 (but less than 20) levels below it)

5. if i attack a chim ("lvl" 80 for instance) and kill it i gain 150% xp (as i am more than 5 (but more than 20 lvls from it)

6 the same goes if i kill a rabbit ("lvl" 5 for arguments sake) i gain 25%xp as i am so far above it

 

ok...i quickly made up these numbers, but i am sure with some thought it can be worked out.

 

equally if you kill the monster, and you deal 100% of the damage to it, you get all the xp...if someone casts a spell on it and deal 10% totall damage, they should get 10% of the xp, and you get 90% etc etc

 

this then solves the problem for multi-combat maps, or someone jumping in just to get the kill

 

this only leaves PVP - i am of the mind that you get NO xp unless you kill someone, i totaly dont like PVP "training" its far to....easy - i think ppl should work for xp.

 

just my thoughts

 

[edit] i forgot to add, that each monster/animal has "lvl" and "nominal xp"

Edited May 30, 2005 by crannog

[The_Piper]

Thinking about getting XP for kills, not fighting rounds, so that ppl would wear and use their weapons, whats about this:

 

Creature has 100 HP. That means you must cause 100 HP damage to kill it.

 

Lets use the caused damage as the base for att XP and the amount of blocked damage for def XP.

 

So, you can fight with weapon or bare handed, the amount of XP you'll get, is always the same.

 

100.

 

Yes, yes, + modifications from levels and so on, but i think, you got my idea.

 

Piper

[trollson]

2. each monster has a certain lvl (for this i will say an ogre = 40)

3. if i attack and kill the ogre i get 100% xp  (as i am +/- 5 lvs from ogre)

4. if i attack a fluffy (perhaps he has "lvl" of 60 i get 120% xp (as i am more than 5 (but less than 20) levels below it)

...

6 the same goes if i kill a rabbit ("lvl" 5 for arguments sake) i gain 25%xp as i am so far above it

165964[/snapback]

 

This sort of graduation is why we have exponential experience level tables:

• Killing the Ogre at level 10 may advance you half of the way to the next level.
  
• Killing the same Ogre at level 20 may only advance you 1/10th of the way to the next level.
  

Don't think in terms of experience points earned, but in fractions of your next level, and you'll see this is already worked in.

 

Of course, exponential experience tables are a remnant from dice&paper RPG (the "true form" ). With computer moderation, we could have equally spaced levels and run-time relative-level experience calculations. But frankly there isn't any benifit in doing that, and its less clear for players.

[crannog]

as for killing the ogre at lvl 10, and advancing 1/2 way to next lvl

 

THAT is the point - if you take the risk at being wiped out, you gain the extra xp, and if your a pussy, and only take on stuff that is much weaker, you take a drop in xp.

 

with the formula i used above, you wont be able to easily train on hard stuff to get alot of xp, due to the fact that p/c is taken into consideration - so you will only still be able to train on stuff close to your lvl - IF they work the calculations out properly

Edited May 30, 2005 by crannog

[trollson]

Lets use the caused damage as the base for att XP and the amount of blocked damage for def XP.

165975[/snapback]

 

That should work well -- the more hit points, the more dangerous; the more damage causing, the more dangerous.

 

There may be some creatures which break this model -- cause non-material damage or something. This could be accounted for in other places though (better drops).

 

Actually though, fighting unarmed still gets you more defense exp, since the fight takes longer, the creature gets more attacks which can be avoided (similarly for just defending). So still go bare handed.

 

as for killing the ogre at lvl 10, and advancing 1/2 way to next lvl

165987[/snapback]

Made-up numbers to illustrate, as you where doing.

 

If you factor in attributes like P/C, you are effectively reducing fighting experience for fighter stereotypes: In the extreme, everyone, regardless of ability, would advance in levels at the same rate. Characters with high fighting-related attributes should advance better in those skills.

Edited May 30, 2005 by trollson

[crannog]

That should work well -- the more hit points, the more dangerous; the more damage causing, the more dangerous.

 

There may be some creatures which break this model -- cause non-material damage or something. This could be accounted for in other places though (better drops).

 

Actually though, fighting unarmed still gets you more defense exp, since the fight takes longer, the creature gets more attacks which can be avoided (similarly for just defending).  So still go bare handed.

 

This is far to similar to how it works now - and this thread is looking for an alternative

 

 

Made-up numbers to illustrate, as you where doing.

 

If you factor in attributes like P/C, you are effectively reducing fighting experience for fighter stereotypes: In the extreme, everyone, regardless of ability, would advance in levels at the same rate.  Characters with high fighting-related attributes should advance better in those skills.

165989[/snapback]

 

yes it does - and that is the point ! imho fighting gets far too much xp in the current system - its just too easy to lvl.

 

but what i am not saying, is that this is a comprehensive thought out system..just a basic idea.

[The_Piper]

This is far to similar to how it works now - and this thread is looking for an alternative

165996[/snapback]

 

Nope, theres a big difference:

 

The current system gives you XP for fighting rounds. If you fight barehanded, you need more rounds (hits) to kill a creature, you get more XP. If you use a weapon now, you get less XP, because you need less hits to kill.

 

The suggestion made was, to give XP for kills. So you dont get any XP while fighting, only the person who finally kills the creature, gets XP.

 

My idea, using the made damage as a base for xp means, you can kill a creature bare handed with maybe 20 hits and get 100 XP, or you can kill it with a weapon in 2 hits and still get 100 XP. Because you make both, barehanded or with weapon, 100 damage to kill the creature.

 

So ppl can and will use weapons again, because there is no advantage in fighting barehanded anymore.

 

Piper

[immerentis]

you can call me retentive on that one but imho

exp from fighting comes from fighting not killing, one can become a master fencing without ever taking out life.

 

 

this is the main advantage of skill training games (such as el , morrowind, dagerfall.. etc etc) over games with genereic xp per kill (final fantasy series, diablo etc)

 

surely one can say that spending years fighting barefist will give you much evasive training and attack training but will never make someone proficient with a sword and that woudl be true, but the way of correcting it is not giving generic experience (in the same way that, i know is not your sugestion, someone shoudl nto be able to simply gain genereic skillpoints and evolve his crafting levels killing critters)

 

if you want more realism, then we shoudl implement different martial skills besides one big generic "attack" , blade weapons, perforation weapons bludgeonic weapons, barehanded fighting etc..

 

this would solve the oh so terryfing "im a better swordman by fighting with my barehands" this woudl also level things out... as training with a deadly weapon should be more dificult.. your enemy dies faster so you have less of a chance to sutdy your blows unless he heals..

this also allows frindly trainingas it exists.. which really opens space for the few people role-playing (master and disciple anyone?) and it allows people who finally DO want to stay a whole carrer as a barehanded fighters to avoid penalties by changin the system.

 

 

of course it would be more dificult (as the more compelte solutions useually are) but is not far-fetched. and is more realistical and assuring than the "kill fozzle X for xp and kill fozzle Y for more xp" scheme.

 

you spend your day training your swordmanship .. you should swing more graciously and precisely than someone who trained with his barehands.... etc etc...

 

get my drift?

[duran]

and by giving out exp pr damage done one fixes the group fighting problem allso as its not just the person that gets the final blow that gets the exp.

 

hmm, only problem i can think of is that it is the person that does the most damage that gets the most exp as then you have exp stealing by walking up to a monster someone si fighting and doing massive amounts of damage to it.

 

but that will in many ways be just as anoying as someone doing something similar today. ie, walking up to someone fighting a cyclops with fists and attacking the monster with a serpent. only diff is that the person with the serpent gets more exp from the new system compared to the old as its damage that regulates the amount given rather then number of hits.

 

but i guess that kill stealing is basicly a unsolvable problem as long as you allow for more then one person pr monster and have people with big diffrences in skill and equipment roaming the same areas.

[The_Piper]

ie, walking up to someone fighting a cyclops with fists and attacking the monster with a serpent. only diff is that the person with the serpent gets more exp from the new system compared to the old as its damage that regulates the amount given rather then number of hits.

 

166237[/snapback]

 

 

Absolutely correct. But why do you wanna fight a cyclops barehanded, if you can get the same amount of XP by using a sword?

 

Piper

[Placid]

Although this isnt a bad idea, there SHOULD be some advantage/disadvantage to using either method.

 

For instance, using a sword should give you more attack exp, without should give you more defence exp.

 

So:

With sword, gives you (using original example):

3000 OA = 2000 Att/1000 Def [purely for arguments sake]

 

Without sword, gives you:

3000 OA = 1000 Att/2000 Def

 

This would allow you to concentrate on both skills still, whether you want to be an agressive or defensive fighter.

 

Although its pretty similar to the current system, it still uses XP by death as apposed to XP by hit.

 

Of course, P/C should have an extremely reduced effect on this new system.

[crannog]

Of course, P/C should have an extremely reduced effect on this new system.

 

i totaly agree...the advantages given by very high p/c are ruining things, makes it TOO easy to raise levels

[Placid]

i totaly agree...the advantages given by very high p/c are ruining things, makes it TOO easy to raise levels

166252[/snapback]

Indeed, its been a problem for a while. Trouble is, its fine if P/C didn't give you so much of an advantage, the EMU boost is a great but I can't (ok, at 38/38/26/28 im still newbish ) defeat someone with all negative perks at 4/4/45/50. Similarly, I can have a better chance (in full plate and serp) against someone with such stats as 70/75/10/10.