Combat and PVP team update!

@Chris

So, I'm watching the PvP hangout and I just want to say: "I support your wand/stave (stay-ve ) position!"

Please, please, please give us a weak mage attack and not a spell repository. I can already cast spells. Give me something to do between spells that is magical and contributes, even if it's weak.

Thanks guys!

 

Yeah, this is one idea from D&D that I'm not a big fan of. It makes wands less interesting in general.

I want wands to be more like Dr. Who's sonic screwdriver...

 

Yes i havent seen much proposals anywhere for a PvP game with as Myrcello claims with -

Since many here liked oldschool UO PvP i rather call it timing instead of reflexes. UO PvP was fast paced but was never based on fast reflexes but timing. It was also a very tactical PvP game.

I have hard time finding any 2 camps and camp 1 is not a camp i seen anywhere. Claiming it is 2 different kind of combat system camps is just not right.

I see more then 2 camps and 1 of those many would like the random and luck based card game to be removed entirely from the game.

 

Come on. We all are not that old. I love reflexes and i want to use my own reflexes.

Yes. It is the hard reality of live that we all have different skills we are born with.

But to say most of us are older now and the majority here does not want game demanding reflexes is just an assumption. Nothing else.

I am not talking Star Craft Pro reflexes. I am not talking about a game that needs 300 hits per Minute on my keyboard to win.

But Ultima Online had enough demand on good reaction. That is enough for many of reflex loving players to still have fun.
But SotA should at least reach the level of reaction Ultima Online did demand.

They made tests with gamers proving that playing pc games since childhood provides us with a huge reflex and eye to body motion training compared to non gamers in our age.
I want to play a game that keeps demanding this from me.

Just because we are not so young or some maybe had a hard time with skilled pvp play does not mean i want SotA to please think of my new "40+ reaction" handicap.

I would actually be almost offended if SotA said: hey we will make the game a little slower for you old Myrcello. We are concerned that the younger ones will demotivate you.

I would make 500 dots on the developers t-shirt with my purple pen on handed in 10 seconds so angry i would be.

You will have a hard time promoting a game that sends the message - will not honor if you have skill.





I am almost disappointed that some claim that just because we are not in our teens anymore that we want this to be respected.

I can only talk from Release 7 , but battle did not demand nothing at all

 

"Camps in Thoughts of Ultima Rhetoric"

After catching up here on all the great discussion, and hearing the great thoughts, it came to my mind a 4th camp

1) Quick Reaction
2) More Turn Based
3) No Cards Quick Reaction
4)<---<<< the undiscovered option base

Let us say I am a physically challenged person that wishes to get in on some of the PvP action, or just wants a more simple way of reacting in combating monsters. Could there not be then a way for such players to have an automatic, or auto pilot for their chr to be able to just spill out whatever skills come from such a built in AI that would allow a player that option?
Sure, it could be made with a bit less speed than the more interactive combat player, yet could still prove out formidable to lower skilled chrs than themselves. The only reason I say that such an AI Auto Pilot could be made a bit more slow than a more interactive player, is because of our base thinking here in our SotA of, "Risk vs Reward".
I know that this 4th option may not be a system that everyone here would wish to use, yet our online games have set so many physically challenged people free, that I believe it could set the standard, for the freeing of many more.
I was thinking that because our SotA is card based, that such a thing as this could be more possible to do than before.
Both the USA as well as Europe have a very large "baby boomer" bubble of population that are all retiring soon and also have the $ to spend as well as the time on their hands to spend it.... Yet also may have those old hands more challenged as they get even older. But there are many advances now in modern medicine that may allow you to live longer and help many younger people that would die of other things to live, yet also leave them bed ridden with no outlet to the world and also physically challenged in many ways. Such a life to those types of people can become as if a prison cell without relief.

"The SotA Combat Auto Pilot Option".... I think could be worth it's investment, because this is the way the AI controls monsters already... while still maintaining the other more interactive options available.

Any Thoughts on this? Is this a likable viable option that's cheap to add into our game?
~Time Lord~

 

Another great, contributing and helpful post by Time Lord!
This suggestion merges PvE with PvP, not only satisfying the scenarios put forth by Time Lord, but would even satisfy the ........ community of PvE-ers as well? Let us hope so. I like the idea.
It could also be used if anybody goes afk. The AI would defend one's toon if a mob, NPC or other player were to attack.

 

Sure there were some reaction skills in UO (Renaissance) but timing of when to cast your spell was what made UO PvP special, not your reaction time and how fast you could press a button.

For example i got poisoned and had to get out of it.

Was the sollution to as fast as possible press my cure poison button?

No it surely wasn't.

When i was poisoned in UO then my opponent just about always casted very fast spells on me to disturb my cure poison spell and that way disturbed my attempt to cure myself.

What i had to do was to time when to cast a very fast spell like clumsy on my opponent and that way disturb his attempt to disturb me.

Then i could cure myself since my opponent was disturbed by my fast spell.

That was just 1 example on how timing spells worked in UO.

Reaction time was good to have but timing was more essential, that and alot of experience and a cold head so you didn't mess up cause you got nervous.

This could take up to a year to learn and some that didn't put in the needed practice never learned it.

UO (Renaissance) had the so far most skill based combat system when it comes to spell casting. So promoting this is not promoting a game with less but more player skills needed.

I agree that there was reaction times and timing when it came to healing a party member that were being dropped by many spells, that took timing and reaction. When doing multiple attacks ( for example explosion/e-bolt) from many party members on 1 enemy took timing though, not reaction time.

So it was abit of both in UO but mainly timing of spells.

 

We don't know if there really are "camps". I think Ara is right. The vast majority has voiced not having fast twitch combat. A reasonable timing based combat has been more the consensus over the past year. Nobody really has argued against that when it's brought up. A few people brought it up and usually would end up seeing the benifit of having a less hectic pace, not nessisarily turn based.

Fast twitch isn't going to be too good for us older people, but old and young can use timing and tactically pace ourselves conserving focus for when we need it and being able to move in and out of combat range reasonably, not like people moving 55 miles per hour, or having combos like Tekkin. (I enjoyed all the tekkin games, but I hope this game is not like tekkin or any other fast twitch figthing game for that matter).

 

WANDS&RODS:

What if there was an alternative that bridges the two styles? One one hand you have a wand or rod that stores spells, the other idea is that a wand or rod works like Harry Potter and it channels energy using the appropriate word of power.

The issue I have with a harry potter style wand is that ALL mages will need to have wands and rods to be competitive because if you want to do an auto attack you need a wand or a rod. I really like wands and rods, (and I will be using a rod if I play a mage), but I don't want to force all mages to use them.

*****************

ALTERNATIVE METHOD:

So DarkStarr's wands seem to have a certain number of charges that the item can hold. You must first cast the spell and use the reagents to create the scroll used in enchantment or something like that... So the charge includes the reagets, but not the mana so it still costs mana from what I gather.

So who's to say we cannot actively charge and discharge a wand or rod dynamically? What if some people learn how to have more stability to magic by using the wand or rod to cast their spells on the fly. Less backfires, and fizzles. Or maybe instead of stability spells can be cast slightly faster using a wand or a rod. Still using reagents and mana.

However there's a limitation. Channeling through a wand or rod might make you cast faster, but you only have the number of charges normally available to the item. So say the wand has 5 charges you can cast 3 or 4 spells really fast and you must let the spell energy dissipate a bit before casting more spells, If you cast all 5 charges at once you super charge the wand and it becomes inert till all the energy dissipates before casting again. So a mage that focuses on using wands and rods for casting might be able to cast a little bit faster, but if they must be careful to not cast too many spells too fast by keeping track of the "charge level" of the wand. If you cast too much then you cannot cast spells through that item until the spell energy fully dissipates. So you cannot cast while the wand is equipped while it is still discharging.

So the wand still is a chargeable item, but it can act as an actively usable wand like a Harry Potter wand too, but it functions in the realm of charges. Also not all mages will want to take this route, because they might want to be able to cast as many spells as their mana allows all at once even if it is slightly slower or less predictable.

***************

Maybe there can be a wand/rod skill for mages who want to have a casting speed or stability increase. It would be like a mage taking up a weapon skill.

 

"Oops a Daisy"
With magic and casting, there is always the thought that some spells could go arbitrary to their intent if not properly cast. Our PvP thoughts are all about "control" and thus we may never think that a spell that could be cast, could actually "backfire" or "do something totally unexpected when it fails"... or most times, "do nothing at all".
I do believe in the random chance being something that is seldom if never to be seen in other games.
Controlling egos dominate all thoughts in PvP and such thoughts of such things as mentioned above could have little hope of being wanted because they are consequential. Players always resist the consequential things for their actions ever being implemented, yet such things as consequences are a large part of what makes SotA different.

this all brings the question of, "could there be a very small chance that something arbitrary or as described above, happen" and could that be a very fun part of our game? Could each spell have it's own list of random that it could have as a chance of happening as a result of it's casting's fail?
Such things could deepen our want to cast a this or that at lower skill levels...
~Time Lord~

 

If wands and rods could work this way, then anybody (warrior, rogue, mage...) could use a charged wand.

However, somebody who takes wands as a weapon skill could use their magic skills through the equiped wand and they can use the wand or rod as a melee weapon (chance to hit) for touch spells and low damage strikes (auto attack).

Sent from my Galaxy S5 using Tapatalk.

 

~Time Lord~

 

... also i guess a guy could pick up bludgeoning skill to use the rod or wand as a pure melee skill set, but a separate wands/staffs weapon skill could also give a person the ability to successfully hit (with auto attack)with the wands/staffs, but it doesn't focus on break and stun skills but magic focusing skills.

So two different uses for wands and staffs could be the armsman with staffs charged with spells, and a different skill for wands and staffs as a mage combat skill for focusing magic and quick strikes.

EDIT: however this still means people could be pure mages without this skill and focus on more magic skills rather than a wand/rod or other weapon skill.

Sent from my Galaxy S5 using Tapatalk.

 

Can we get the ability to select a party members health bar to heal them?
It's quite difficult to select the individuals body (avatar) when in a chaotic battle.

 

hang on, so now a mage isn't just hobbled by deck, reagents, lack of armor but now there is no auto attack and you need a wand as well? come on give us a break

 

I'm not a big fan of "wands or staffs" being anything but a defective weapon, unless you're channeling magic through it...

In the above clip, you can see that those guys my hurt each other, but neither is going to die or be able to kill each other by using Tinker Bell's magic little stick. Even if that stick is made of lead, it would be difficult to close with the enemy to use it with lethal force.

Magic I my opinion should be best with hands free and maybe the wand, but after that, the hands ad wand are generally not lethal force weapons... this could be argued that the hands could, but that all involves the neck choking, whiplash breakage or head popping which I don't feel suits our game well... Yet these same things can be very useful in "defensive ways" with much more potency than they do (if at all) in the lethal.

I feel that by adding something to a wand or staff, is the only way to make them into a lethal add formidable weapon, but this takes time to do and should never be instant... but, "you should have brought something else with you to a steel and armor melee battle". When we channel magic through weapons of steel, that's when magic should suffer and wooden weapons should have little magic reduction, with only the hands being magic's most powerful delivery system.

Without steel, the stick is nothing but a stick, no matter how long or short it is. Though a long stick is better defensively than a short one. Let's leave Tinker Bell's wand and staffs for the defense in melee and for the offence in only magic with charges and channeling. Because even if it's a solid lead pipe, a wand is not lethal unless the opponent has no armor, with nothing on their head and weaponless.
~Time Lord~

 

I don't think Merlin used anything for magic. Once in awhile he used a wand and sometimes carried a staff, but for the most part he only used his hands. Oh and sometimes a magic book.

 

I do agree with some mages using empty hands. Sometimes using a wand. Personally I really like the idea of having a practical Scepter as a mage item, and it's mostly for looks. (Although I would like there to be a practical reason too, but the whole presence is what I'm after. I realize a mage can be a mage and skills will all be balanced in the end, I want presence in my character)

Months ago I posted stuff asking for wands and stuff too, but probably the biggest reason was because my daughter was watching a lot of Sleeping Beauty at the time. I really liked how Maleficent was probably one of the most scary disney villans in the old school movies. She was the most awesome too. I didn't watch the current movie, nor do I even care to. I just liked the look of Maleficent.

When Maleficent entered the room she was clearly not to be messed with just by looking at her. She had a long black gown, and carried a regal scepter (which she would hit the ground with when she made a verbal proclamation, and it had an echoing clank). She spoke with the eloquence of an aristocrat, and her tone was high and mighty ... even defying the king and queen in their own court, and she flaunted that power in their faces by placing an evil prophesy over the child because she wasn't properly invited to the ceremony.

Now I don't want to have a character as evil as maleficent, but I liked the qualities she had, and her regal and powerful presence. I liked how she smaked the ground with her scepter, and made a scene then teleported away laughing. She was a true arch-mage. ... a not so nice one, but clearly one none the less.



None of the youtube videos out there I could find had the original voice, nor did it keep the sound of the scepter hitting the ground and echoing through the whole court. However her grand appearance, and dramatic exit were really marks of what I wanted to see in my character if he were a mage in SotA.

EDIT: It is totally possible to have the same presence without a scepter, or a wand. However, having certain elements, like clothing, an amulet, or some magical stuff adds to the persona. A mage can be equally powerful looking dressed in a tight fitting outfit that looks like a high quality martial arts gi, and unrestricted arms and legs. not all mages have to wear heavy robes.

 

Here's a picture of a ninja... but couldn't that just be another cool way to dress up your mage? Warriors are kind of straight forward because we all know what a warrior in armor looks like, but a mage can look like anything, but I think the imagination would like to express itself in our character. Let mages be what mages be. So I agree that not all mages should have staffs or wands, and the more free we are to express our maginess in our character, with wands or ninja outfits or staffs or being topless with puffy genii pants.... mages are mysterious and cool. Magic and imagination go hand in hand.



If I were a mage mostly focused in Lunar, Wind, and Death magic, this would be how I might dress him. Then again this guy could be any anything mysterious. ... Now his power better back up his outfit though, otherwise he's a joke.

If a guy like that walked into Pizza Hut people would be sayin he's a nut, unless he shot lighting out of his hands or did a flip and pulled out his blade and sheathed it again in one move.

 

If we are looking at realism (which usually doesn't = fun)
1) moving and shooting simply doesn't happen, you can't draw a bow while taking a step, unless it's a really light draw, you need your feet planted to get the leverage you need, plus aiming with any kind of accuracy requires you to be still, holding your feet in position. (see bow stance below). Basically if you even allow it, it should have like a 99% miss chance.


2) Strength could be the largest factor when shooting a bow, simply because you can use a heavier draw. Your arrows are the same, just more power behind it to punch through. So utilizing certain bows can have minimum strength requirements, an English Long Bow should require maximum strength.. and might have some armor penetration. But using the same bow, someone with higher strength shouldn't get extra damage. I don't believe shooting a bow requires dexterity at all, even though most games for some reason place bows in a dexterity field, there really is no dexterity involved other than possibly finger dexterity, but even then it isn't a very delicate operation where you need to be nimble. I'm fairly clumsy.. I'd rate my dexterity very low, yet I'm pretty good with a bow.


I can't think of a realistic reason to reduce defense while using a bow.

3) Bows should use a lot of focus to use, you shouldn't get very many shots with them (My accuracy goes way down after about 5 or 6 arrows without a short rest-using a hunting bow-65lbs draw weight, many competition archers use much lower weight, but it wouldn't have the penetration(damage) of a good hunting bow). Make them high damage but limited use, or low damage with a lot of use. mix it up so people can choose the bow they want.

4) The problem with aiming is, you don't want to take time to aim. The longer you hold it, the more strength you use, and the shakier you get. You want to release as fast as possible for your best shot. Aiming is just part of being able to hit anything, so without an aim skill you can make it so people have a much higher chance of missing, with no training in bow skill you should miss 99% of your shots.

5) Range, closer something is usually is easier to hit and the more penetration you'll get (energy isn't spent in flight), but most archers are comfortable at certain ranges that they've practiced on so they know how high/low to hold it over their target. Most archery hunters aren't doing anything over 100 yards. Concealment is the key to success. My dad has missed 15 yard shots before because he simply didn't practice it and his scope didn't go that low.

Missing - many shots should miss if conditions aren't ideal. you are moving, the target is moving. But if you hit, it should be a good deal of damage.


That's just if you wanted something realistic, most games aren't realistic for archery... possibly because it simply isn't that much fun... but rather than changing damage amounts I'd like to see a lot more missing.. most games don't have much missing for their archers. I don't care if you are Robin Hood, you miss if things aren't standing still and you aren't standing still and you are trying to shoot through a bunch of bushes.