Let's talk about combat!

Does the DEV+ Combat, Magic, Skills, Advancement (MEGA POST) thread count?

Does this concept for a combos deck count towards 'optimised[sic] decks being posted on forums for everyone to copy'?


edited for DEV+ content

 

Yeah, I saw that earlier but didn't link it cus it's in the Dev+ area. There's another one from Chris in his "Let's talk about combat" post too, also in the Dev+ area.

It's probably ok since it's likely common knowledge, but a mod or dev should chime in here. It's odd that the section was removed from the post when it was placed in the General Forums.

 

It's dev+ so not everybody can read it.

 

Okay, but if it's in the Dev+ forum, as others have stated, then that'd be why I didn't read it.

Spells: that's a good point, actually. I'm not sure I like the idea of spells being only available at certain times either. I'd prefer spells to be limited only by how much 'mana' (to use the popular term) you have available, and by reagents, if they're still using that system (I think that's how it worked in Ultima Online - I almost never play magic users).

I only think melee combat should work this way, because fighting is quite a random affair, not one that can be precisely calculated and predicted, which is why I don't like the WoW system of "you can do all the special attacks as and when you want to". Casting a spell, however, is supposed to be a precisely calculated affair, but it should cost you to do it (so that you can't simply spam the heck out of your fireballs ).

 

@Squire you and I are totally on the same page about melee and spells.

 

I was thinking about that earlier and I think I agree, too. A spell should take a second to cast and have a danger of being interrupted (if you're not heavily armored) and should probably be cast out of a spell book (ooh, or typing in the magic keywords!). The skill bar could be for non-magic combat, escape skills, temporary buffs or whathaveyou and would still be very relevant for magic users since tactically they would become a high priority target.

 

Hahaha, that would be interesting! Having to type out a chat-string of pseudo-Latin words to cast spells would add a new dimension to magic use in games, and would certainly be doable with the chat system that they're using.

I doubt it'll happen though...not many people would enjoy it, and it would probably get annoying after a while, if you had to type out "manus potentus aurum!" or something like that every time you cast a spell (not to mention being required to commit all of those chat strings to memory). Though that gives me an idea...maybe casting a spell could automatically generate the chat string and make you say it in the game! It won't add anything to the game, but it'd be funny.

 

That is how UO did it, you cast the spell and your character says it, appearing above your head. Corp Por. Corp Por.

 

Well, that could just be a neat alternative way to cast magic. I do think it would be better overall if you cast it from a spellbook by default instead of a random skill bar.

 

Agreed. In fact, it could even be worked into the pledges: certain pledge levels get you a hardback copy of the spellbook, which has every spell in the game and its casting string written out for you!

And that's cool that UO had that (I did play it but I never played magic users).

 

That's actually pretty much how it worked in Ultima V, only that you didn't have to type the whole magic word, but only the initial.
For example, pressing "I" the game would type "In", then you pressed "M" and the game would add "Mani", then you press Enter and you have cast a light heal spell.
For speaking mantras at the shrines though you had to write the whole mantra. Three times.
Ah, those were the days!

 

So it would be like, the adventuring tree is activated from your skill bar, the magic tree is activated from your spellbook, and the crafting tree is activated from wherever crafting is done from.

I really do like the idea of keeping all the non-spell skills on the skill bar and all the magic castable from a spellbook (or chat ). It's not really an Ultima game unless there's a bunch of non-combat magic spells anyway, right?

 

There are non combat spells and you will have access to certain spells outside of combat. An example they gave was Control demon can't be cast unless in combat because the only way to cast it is if you are combat with a demon. And the air ability that lets you flip a switch will obviously be available outside of combat. These wont be random, they'll just be on your bar ready to use, disappearing when you enter combat.


Part of the design of this system is to allow higher damage combos if you are lucky enough to get them. If you had the abilities available all the time they wouldn't be able to do that. An example is if you get 3 fireballs up and combine 2 into a bigger fireball, you can add the 3rd to make an even bigger one. Basically more damage than the 3 individual ones and less focus(mana) cost. (I'm assuming that last bit, and that combo might not be in the game) Because you were lucky enough to get 3.

 

Got to give the devs a high five for having balls and coming up with something like this, however, after reading through the thread i think I'm the only one to realise the single most major flaw in the system

Deck - This is a set of skills that the player has created or the game has created for the player. There is a minimum number of skills that can go into a deck based on the player’s level. It will start at around 10 skills at level one and rise to around 30 skills at level 20. Players can have multiple decks configured and swap them in and out when not in combat. Players will be able to switch during combat but it will take several seconds of doing nothing.

How can anyone engaged in PVE ever defend against a PK gank if they can't change to their PVP deck on-the-fly?

It looks to me as though PKers will have a field day.

 

Because those in PvE only mode will likely not be "flagged" for PvP so this point is null. Also, this isn't WoW where you have to have one pvp and one pve way of doing things... in UO I just "PvP skilled" the monsters and then when PKers came around I didn't have to change anything I'm a big fan of Anti-PK so if there is something close to what you're talking about I'll be on the front lines crying for a change... I just think it's a fraction (maybe 3 months?) to early to call it "the single most major flaw in the system"

Edit: yeah this isn't UO2 but the example applies

 

Is that likely to be an issue? I'm not sure there'd be a need to have separate decks for PVE and PVP. Surely most of the skills you use in PVE situations will also work for PVP.

The only time I can really think of which will require a change of decks is if you're fighting a foe radically different to the one you're currently fighting, against which the skills you've put into your current deck won't be much use against - for example, if you have a lot of fast but low damage attacks, and are suddenly facing a guy in full harness, you'll need to change to the deck with mostly strong attacks, as you try to break through his armour - but that can happen just as easily in PVE; you're fighting a load of weak goblins, and suddenly their chieftain comes up in his bone cuirass and takes exception to you killing his arrow fodder friends.

Also, you seem to be assuming that the combat skills are essential for winning every fight, and having the wrong skills prepared will equal death. We don't know that that will necessarily be the case.

 

I would concur with Squire and violation. If you look at the proposed combat skills you'll see there don't seem to be any that are particularly more effective in pvp vs pve, unlike other games. I expect you'll have a standard deck that is effective for most pvp and pve encounters, and specialize for special areas. There is also the consideration of, who is ganking in this game? We don't yet know how PVP will be implemented, but it might be you will be flagged in pvp based on the area you are in, by a quest you undertook, or something along those lines. In which case you'll know you are at risk and be ready with your best possible pvp skills/spells. The other option is you join a guild flagged for full time pvp, in which case you should always be ready for pvp.. these are just guesses on how it would work.

 

I can tell you exactly how. They NEVER EVER EVER will see a PK. Problem solved. You have to intentionally flag yourself for PvP. PvP is a choice not mandatory for all.

 

I like the fact that they aren't creating PvP items and stuff. However since they are giving us the ability to create multiple decks I will definitely have a PvE deck (with more area of effect spells or whatever), and a PvP (focused more on killing a single individual). Those two basic decks at a minimum. People who don't PvP need not worry about a PvP deck.

 

Reading through the combat system threads is making my head spin. (This is what I get for not following it all sooner) Whatever system is designed I am hoping it is a fairly fluid system. I have no problem with using a deck system which limits the amount of Spells/skills that can be used. It allows me to decided if I want to build a full single target damage deck, area of effect damage deck, a Crowd Control deck, etc. I never liked games where I could use all the skills available to me. I rather preferred being able to figure out which would work best for me when I am soloing and what would be a good build for when I was with other players. In team play I never cared about being the damage dealer, I preferred to play a mix of crowd control and healing.

Getting back to the fluid system, I thought I read way back about combat being turn based. I hope someone can point me into an updated discussion on that issue. I am hoping that is not the case and that combat with follow the typical formula of two handed weapons take longer to wield then one handed, higher level spells take longer to cast then lower level spells. As much as I enjoy playing Hearthstone, waiting for the other person or computer player to play their cards is painstaking.