How to design a great combat system + mechanics? (PvP)
This depends on the player's skill level. At high level, yes they can identify and use a counter move and this is not random at all. However, you need lots of practice and you need to study the game down to the frame length of every skill and have muscle memory of combos. For mortals, the reaction time is too slow to counter moves as they come, so it becomes a game of second guessing where you pick a move and pit it against whatever the other guy picked. Pattern identification is crucial at this level, just like it is with RPS. It's easy to identify and counter the thought patterns of an RPS player after a few games. Few people play RPS in a pure random manner.
Author
This depends on the player's skill level. At high level, yes they can identify and use a counter move and this is not random at all. However, you need lots of practice and you need to study the game down to the frame length of every skill and have muscle memory of combos. For mortals, the reaction time is too slow to counter moves as they come, so it becomes a game of second guessing where you pick a move and pit it against whatever the other guy picked. Pattern identification is crucial at this level, just like it is with RPS. It's easy to identify and counter the thought patterns of an RPS player after a few games. Few people play RPS in a pure random manner.
Trust me, You don't need the be a "pro" to start recognizing moves and countering them.
MOST people including average players and sometimes even the less than average players can do that too.
To be a "high lvl" player aka pro you need to do a lot more than just that.
Author
Recap: We can't trust ourselves, we have to assume we don't know exactly what we're doing. We don't know which players know how to do it the right way. So my conclusion, I hate it but.. We have to design the combat so that the majority, mass players enjoy it. Aka simpify it, add RNG and classes for lots of diversity and randomness etc.
I just thought I'd explain why I came to this conclusion which most games have as well.
The difference is that they ain't trying to create a perfect combat system, their goal is just pleasing as many players as they can to make money.
My reasoning is that if we can't trust ourselves and don't know who to trust.. It's best to trust the majority who says the same thing as each other.
I'd love if anyone came up with a better theory about how to create a masterpiece combat system + mechanics because I really hate mainstream games.
I believe it's fairly easy to design entertaining combat mechanics if you drop the the RPG-goggles.
Pretty much nobody even discussed balancing of first person shooters until the arrival of level based shooters and while some maintain that several fighting games are severely broken, it takes a lot of dedication to arrive at a point where such nuances become noticeable. Also there are a number of sword fighting games that have extremely rewarding player versus player combat, despite the usage of inventories and skill-levels. The list goes on.
What I'm saying is that player versus player combat in traditional RPGs are just a "run to 0 HP" because that is exactly how they are designed. That works very well in a table-top game but doesn't deliver when you want interesting player versus player fights.
Pretty much nobody even discussed balancing of first person shooters until the arrival of level based shooters and while some maintain that several fighting games are severely broken, it takes a lot of dedication to arrive at a point where such nuances become noticeable. Also there are a number of sword fighting games that have extremely rewarding player versus player combat, despite the usage of inventories and skill-levels. The list goes on.
What I'm saying is that player versus player combat in traditional RPGs are just a "run to 0 HP" because that is exactly how they are designed. That works very well in a table-top game but doesn't deliver when you want interesting player versus player fights.
Author
I believe it's fairly easy to design entertaining combat mechanics if you drop the the RPG-goggles.
Pretty much nobody even discussed balancing of first person shooters until the arrival of level based shooters and while some maintain that several fighting games are severely broken, it takes a lot of dedication to arrive at a point where such nuances become noticeable. Also there are a number of sword fighting games that have extremely rewarding player versus player combat, despite the usage of inventories and skill-levels. The list goes on.
What I'm saying is that player versus player combat in traditional RPGs are just a "run to 0 HP" because that is exactly how they are designed. That works very well in a table-top game but doesn't deliver when you want interesting player versus player fights.
Maybe I wasn't clear enough that an entertaining combat system wasn't the intention but a balanced one.. and complex etc.
Didn't mention shooter games because that is extremely easy to balance as I'm assuming everyone knows.
I believe rpg styled combat systems can work great if done well, I still think the combat system Ultima Online had has been the best one so far.
Back then (like 10-15 years or something?) I wasn't elite as I am now but I was limited by my internet connection back then giving me high ping.
But I am 99% sure that when you get near to the max potential of human skill in that game.. It's not possible to kill another player 1v1 if both are playing perfectly.. Which is great, It took a lot of skill to heal yourself, and even more skill to kill, and the only way to kill was by playing perfectly longer than your opponent and putting enough pressure to cause him to make a mistake, and to try and be the attacker as much as possible instead of the healer.
I believe rpg styled combat systems can work great if done well, I still think the combat system Ultima Online had has been the best one so far.
Back then (like 10-15 years or something?) I wasn't elite as I am now but I was limited by my internet connection back then giving me high ping.
But I am 99% sure that when you get near to the max potential of human skill in that game.. It's not possible to kill another player 1v1 if both are playing perfectly.. Which is great, It took a lot of skill to heal yourself, and even more skill to kill, and the only way to kill was by playing perfectly longer than your opponent and putting enough pressure to cause him to make a mistake, and to try and be the attacker as much as possible instead of the healer.
That's about what I said earlier about creating a combat system that isn't a race to 0HP but instead relies on higher level mechanics. In the case of UO, it worked because their power range was narrow. They could make it so you were in a situation where you could counter the damage by healing, but not enough to completely shut down someone. This is a delicate balance that is impossible with the current RPG design that is based on infinite power growth. I remember back when I played WoW, before the first expansion, my priest with purple gear could out heal any rogue that wasn't in full blue, without losing any mana. Highly varied character power and pvp based on a race to 0HP do not play well with each other.
For these type of games, one way to do it is with a volatile value used to absorb damage and direct flow and a hard to lose, hard to regain health system. Some examples :
- Dissidia : 2 types of attacks. Landing one type boosts the potential HP damage of the second type of attacks. Even if you are low HP, if you get hit you can still come back.
- Infantry : Keeping your energy high almost negates damage. As long as you space out incoming hits, you gain the upper hand. If your energy is drained, you become highly vulnerable.
- Bloodline Champions : You can only regain up to a maximum HP value. If you take too much damage, your max HP will lower. If you space out damage, you can get back to full. As long as you don't allow your max HP to get lower, you don't lose potential power.
Then you build abilities to manipulate this value in various ways and counter other abilities. As long as you properly counter and manipulate the combat flow in your favor, you maintain your power, but if you fail a few times in a row, you get closer to defeat.
I agree with the post before mine. Lower the power curve from start to end game and it generally provides more enjoyable PvP.
I guess the real issue I am coming up against is in regards to how to make PvP in an open world without it becoming a gankfest.
For example: World of Warcraft(Don't slap me, seriously).
I found the open world PvP on a PvP server to hold no meaning aside from harassing other players. There was no "greater good" for your side to fight for. What could be done to make the PvP more meaningful?
On the other side I found PvE servers to be dreadfully boring. Alliance and Horde walking side by side? Dirty.
So, how could we avoid having PvE and PvP servers? Well, to have both built into one game. Those that want to PvE can have a safe area to avoid PvP conflict, but the PvE players travel would have to be limited to avoid PvP areas. So how can this all be done using the world design of World of Warcraft as a basic concepting process? How can you promote healthy meaningful PvP while still providing an enjoyable experience for those that don't care as much about PvP?
Simply having PvP and PvE servers is not a good solution in my mind. It causes a division of players right from the get go. I see guilds get split up because of bad experiences using systems like this in the past. How can we avoid that in the future?
I guess the real issue I am coming up against is in regards to how to make PvP in an open world without it becoming a gankfest.
For example: World of Warcraft(Don't slap me, seriously).
I found the open world PvP on a PvP server to hold no meaning aside from harassing other players. There was no "greater good" for your side to fight for. What could be done to make the PvP more meaningful?
On the other side I found PvE servers to be dreadfully boring. Alliance and Horde walking side by side? Dirty.
So, how could we avoid having PvE and PvP servers? Well, to have both built into one game. Those that want to PvE can have a safe area to avoid PvP conflict, but the PvE players travel would have to be limited to avoid PvP areas. So how can this all be done using the world design of World of Warcraft as a basic concepting process? How can you promote healthy meaningful PvP while still providing an enjoyable experience for those that don't care as much about PvP?
Simply having PvP and PvE servers is not a good solution in my mind. It causes a division of players right from the get go. I see guilds get split up because of bad experiences using systems like this in the past. How can we avoid that in the future?
Author
I agree with the post before mine. Lower the power curve from start to end game and it generally provides more enjoyable PvP.
I guess the real issue I am coming up against is in regards to how to make PvP in an open world without it becoming a gankfest.
For example: World of Warcraft(Don't slap me, seriously).
I found the open world PvP on a PvP server to hold no meaning aside from harassing other players. There was no "greater good" for your side to fight for. What could be done to make the PvP more meaningful?
On the other side I found PvE servers to be dreadfully boring. Alliance and Horde walking side by side? Dirty.
So, how could we avoid having PvE and PvP servers? Well, to have both built into one game. Those that want to PvE can have a safe area to avoid PvP conflict, but the PvE players travel would have to be limited to avoid PvP areas. So how can this all be done using the world design of World of Warcraft as a basic concepting process? How can you promote healthy meaningful PvP while still providing an enjoyable experience for those that don't care as much about PvP?
Simply having PvP and PvE servers is not a good solution in my mind. It causes a division of players right from the get go. I see guilds get split up because of bad experiences using systems like this in the past. How can we avoid that in the future?
You're about to make the thread go off topic :/
I want to give my opinion but then I'd just help making it off topic lol
[size=1]Give consequences for PKing. OR What I always believed is that players will and should handle it themselves. Don't walk around like a sitting duck for any PKs is a skill too. You can't make PvP limited zones or vice versa because it's same thing as creating instanced battlegrounds or PvP/PvE servers.
[size=1]Also Open PvP NEEDS death penalties.
You're about to make the thread go off topic :/
I want to give my opinion but then I'd just help making it off topic lol
My apologies, that isn't my intention at all. It takes more than just the specific combat decisions to make good "PvP mechanics", as in where PvP actually fits within the game. If this is not the intention of the thread I can start another one at the OP's request. I was only using WoW, which I generally don't like to do, to try and get into what actually makes for good meaningful PvP and the mechanics necessary to invoke it by using a game that a lot of people have experience with and what jumped out to me as an overall weak PvP product. Battlegrounds and Arenas have their place, but that isn't sustainable, enjoyable, and meaningful PvP.
*Edit*
Or, using the world of EQ1, without the need for tiny zonelines and remove the loading screens as well. The cities had NPC faction restrictions to prevent certain races from entering certain cities, but how can it translate to PvP without the entire world being people just ganking each other all the time? Trying to provide at least some form of casual PvE where you can play in peace with friends should be provided.
None of you explained why balanced 1vs1 games are better ?
Lets take league of legends, they claim that class unbalance is what makes the game "fun", allowing more diverse playstyle, options.
A 1% hp tryndamere can easily go 1vs5 and win alone. He kills enemies in 2 hits=kills every 1 sec, and his ult makes him unkillable for 5 seconds. If fed he can heal more dmg than enemies deal.
Lets take league of legends, they claim that class unbalance is what makes the game "fun", allowing more diverse playstyle, options.
A 1% hp tryndamere can easily go 1vs5 and win alone. He kills enemies in 2 hits=kills every 1 sec, and his ult makes him unkillable for 5 seconds. If fed he can heal more dmg than enemies deal.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
