Saber system suggestions

[JRHockney*]

I was going to wait until I could retrieve my old ideas from the MB site, but I just realized that my ideas have changed with my new found understanding of the new system.

 

First off, great job on the saber throw, changing red style to unlimited chaining (now its actually fun to use!), and making fakes much easier. I will say that the styles still do not move at the same speed though (red and purple still have a longer wined up), which is fine as long as the slower styles have some kind of advantage over the quicker (such as bigger reach, power, or greater defense).

 

The way I picture this saber system achieving ultimate greatness is by increasing the time at which saber "volleying" takes place without stuns, knockdowns, and disarms (which still seem to happen too often, sadly). I've found ways of getting into volleys with TABBOTS and they look spectacular and are intense!! This volleying usually happens when I hold down attack and attack in different directions as the TABBOT does the same thing and it takes at least a second or two of saber collisons before one of use gets stunned, knocked down, or disarmed.

 

In order to increase saber volleying I have a few suggestions:

 

1. prohibit stuns until after the opponents dodge/block meter is below the halfway point. Since the dodge meter all ready works as a block meter, this should make for some great volleys.

 

2. prohibit disarms and knockdowns until the force point meter is below 40 or 50. This is more realistic because a real jedi wouldn't lose their saber or get knocked down at full strength. It would also be a good indicator of what the opponent is low on (dodge or fp meter wise) and increase general volleying.

 

3. While both fighter's meters are high, what use to stun, knockdown, or disarm will now only lower the reciever's dodge meter until it is past the half way point. The person who has attacked or defended correctly will not lose any dodge points for his action. I hope this explains the logic of the upper two suggestions sufficiently.

 

4. I think it would also be cool to promote defending with an attack (a.k.a. swing blocking) by lowering the dodge points lost in moving the wrong way in defending or attacking (that would normally get you stunned, disarmed, or knocked down in this system) if that person is also in the middle of a swing. The only problem with this, is that it puts slower styles at a disadvantage so I would suggest uping their defense or power.

 

I remember from our MB converation that you made the stuns primarly to deal with noobs, which was a good idea but they just happen too often. Under my suggestions, a noob would still get destoryed by anyone who knows what their doing, but not before the noob witnesses the spectacular potential of volleying and other mechanics of this system in general (and thus, make him want to really learn it well)

 

I also would suggest bringing back katas (wait!!!!! he me out!!! LOL) but they will disarm the user unless the defender has less than 25 fp. Thus, they would be only used as finishing moves!!!

 

I also think that one of the saber styles should be balanced for usage only for fight two or more people. I don't know how this would be done, but I'm sure you could think of some way.

 

Lastly, in order for these suggestions to work, the fp gain would have to anyways be at deflaut or higher, otherwise players will run out of fp too quickly.

 

Hopefully you will find these suggestions more in tuned with you saber system. I look forward to your comments.

 

By the way Razor, you mentioned you were self taught at all this coding stuff. How did you go about doing that?

[razorace]

hmmmm, I'm starting to like your suggestions about the volleying. However, I'm a bit worried about how the attacker's DP will be drained in this situation. It seems to me that attacker DP should be drained from successfully parrying on the defender's part. However, it's going to be tricky to balance the DP drain enough to make defending/attacking balanced.

 

Along those lines, I don't really think that "swing blocking" will work for two reasons. First off, the action is too fast for players to be able to fully handle, this is the same reason why manual blocking wasn't much of a success. Secondly, I'm not really sure there's a way to differ between a normal attack and a "swing block". Again, we don't want to overpower the attackers vs the defenders.

 

As for katas, you make a good arguement, but I was kind of hoping to come up with something different for the use of the attack + altattack button combo. Maybe additional melee strikes or special finishing moves.

 

Finally, as for self-teaching, I did take several coding classes before getting into modding, but I had to learn all about modding myself. It's really just a matter of understanding the basics of coding, and then just diving into the code.

[JRHockney*]

hmmmm, I'm starting to like your suggestions about the volleying. However, I'm a bit worried about how the attacker's DP will be drained in this situation. It seems to me that attacker DP should be drained from successfully parrying on the defender's part. However, it's going to be tricky to balance the DP drain enough to make defending/attacking balanced.

 

I'm glad you like the suggestion, but I see how it might be difficult to balance. Although I still think its worth a shot for the sake of theatrics and realism of the system.

 

I agree that the attackers DP should be drained from being successfully parried, but the defender should still lose DP if he does not parry the attack in the right direction. A successful attack or defense should cause the same amount of DP loss.

 

One way to make the it more obvious (and perhaps balanced) as to who successfully attacked and defended (without stopping the action) would be to put a 1/4 second delay in the losers drawback of his block or attack. The loser who pause in what ever way you decide and only be able to block in that pause without being able to attack.

 

For example: if and attacker gets parried by a defender, the attackers saber would either freeze where it was parried or pull back in slow motion for 1/4-1/3 of a second and for that short time period the attacker wouldn't be able to swing again. This may give the defender just enough time to start to start his attack first before the former attacker can start his again. It would be just like a Micro-stun without really stopping the action! On the other hand, a defender who unsuccessfully parried an attack (moved in the wrong direction) would be would also pause and be unable to attack for that 1/4-1/3 second. The pause should only be long enough person who successfully parried or attacked to start the next swing first.

 

Along those lines, I don't really think that "swing blocking" will work for two reasons. First off, the action is too fast for players to be able to fully handle, this is the same reason why manual blocking wasn't much of a success. Secondly, I'm not really sure there's a way to differ between a normal attack and a "swing block". Again, we don't want to overpower the attackers vs the defenders.

 

Your right. However, I wouldn't give up on swing blocking too easily (it did work in MB {even though their system is different}). I noticed that parrying can still take place even while I'm swing today when I was fighting TABBOTs (I dont know, maybe it was a bug).

 

I just thought of a way to include swing blocking and distinguish between attacking and defending while using it. First, Make it so that two people attacking eachother (or holding down attack) at the same time don't lose any DP and all the attacks are auto blocked with the swings.

 

While the sabers are both attacking, in order to successfully parry while swinging, one of the saberists will press ALT ATTACK and the correct parry direction (to the attackers swing) to become the defender and make the attacker pause and lose DP.

 

If a saberist presses the press ALT attack while swinging and moves in the wrong to the attackers swing, that saberist will get paused and lose DP. The DP penalties for this type of parrying or miss parrying should be less than the regular way (the way I listed for the first quote).

 

In this fashion, the "fake" button also becomes a parry button in a swing. It would probably make doing regular fakes a little more dangerous, but their dangerous to do in real life too more or less. The point of these ideas is to teach the player to watch the other players saber even in an intense volley. It might seem fast at first, but I think the good player will start to use the "swing block/parrying" more often once they get use to it because it looks cooler and saves their DP from going down too quickly.

 

I'm sure this would be a pain to code, but it would create the kind of cinematic "volleys" we've been talking about and make it really fun to watch.

 

As for katas, you make a good arguement, but I was kind of hoping to come up with something different for the use of the attack + altattack button combo. Maybe additional melee strikes or special finishing moves.

 

Good idea. I won't miss them anyway! LOL! Although the saber trailing in them effect might be useful for eventually creating slower power swings of some kind, but your guess is as good as mine as to how that could be done and balanced.

 

Finally, as for self-teaching, I did take several coding classes before getting into modding, but I had to learn all about modding myself. It's really just a matter of understanding the basics of coding, and then just diving into the code.

 

Wow. Hmm, just Knowing the basics, huh. Do you think I could learn it from a web tutorial or reading C for Dummies! lol. Thats probably the only way I'll learn! Any suggestions on a good tutorial website or websites?

[razorace]

Sorry, I guess I forgot to respond to this thread.

 

Anyway, as for swing parrying, I see two problems:

1. Since the player is controlling the direction of attack, he's going to know which way he'd need to move to be able to move into an attack. In addition, pure saber-on-saber impacts have a bit more irradic impact positions than when doing saber defense.

2. I'd be worried that this would over balance the game in the favor of attack. I suppose a swing parry could be less likely to successfully parry vs a purely defensive. As such, I think it would end up complicating things more than the value of new feature.

 

And on to "new" business

1. After play testing with humans a bit more, we need to consider the player movement speeds. I noticed that it's too easy/unrealistic in the way that defending/lossing players can dart out of the way by running backwards. The same problem applies to gunners. As such, I'm thinking that a wise course of action would be to lower the movement speed of backwards running and pure (IE totally left/right) strafing. A real person isn't able to run sideways or backwards THAT much faster than they can walk quickly backwards/strafe.

[JRHockney*]

I see the logic in the problems you stated for the swing parrying idea.

 

I will probably still try to use swings as blocks in my own fighting style because It doesnt cost any dp and it confuses that heck out of human opponents! lol. Who knows, if I can figure out how to code, I might try adding the suggestion myself just to see if it works or not.

 

I do hope you keep my first Idea about longer volleying by prohibiting stuns until 50% dp or so and knockdowns and disarms until under maybe 40 fp. As long as a successful attack and a successful defense cause the same amount of dp loss, it should be balanced. I also think the slight delay idea (my second post) that I put after it will be a good one too go with it. If you have a better idea on how this type of volleying could take place, I'd love to hear it. I think that anything that would keep the action alive with out the overly prevailent stuns will make few people I've talked to who don't like this system give it another chance.

 

Your idea about making running backwards slower is a great idea especially with this combat system. It will keep saber combat in close proximity and it won't be a death sentence for gunners because they still have the dodge meter. Good Thinkin. I love the smile face options here! lol

 

As far as saberists dealing with gunners, I might also suggest making an anti-gunner saber key that allows saberists to run and attack without stopping or using force power. The catch with this would be if when using this anti-gunner saber style, if a saber hits you or you hit a saber with your saber, you get disarmed!

[razorace]

I am planning on trying your volley related suggestions. Don't worry.

 

As for an anti-gunner style, it's a bit unnessicary since players can already run and attack without penalty as mishaps only occur during saber-on-saber impacts.

[JRHockney*]

Hooray!! This is worthy of another Strongbad dance!

 

About that last suggestion, I was mainly worried about force drain since it is still used in swinging and If I fought a few gunners, I might not have any force power left for fighting someone with a saber (kind of like what happened when I tried to fight you after fighting that gunner that one time). Of course this is only a problem when fp gain is set more slowly than default like it is on fridays usually. It probably wouldn't be a problem otherwise. And the mishaps from this suggestion would only happen on saber contact so people wouldn't be able to swing spam with no fp loss when fighting another saberist.

 

Your previous suggestion about slower running backward would also solve this problem mostly, my suggestion is only if you felt it wasn't enough to kill good gunners. I'm still think in MB mode when it comes to fighting gunners so it probably isn;t needed too badly. I often forget that jedi can use guns in this mod!

[razorace]

Hmmm, I'm not sure if it's a problem or not since a player's FP reserve is very large. In theory, you can make 100 swings while running before you run out of fatigue. We'll have to wait and see. Remember that the gunners may or may not have a lot of Dodge based on their current skill level (not currently implimented).

[JRHockney*]

Ok, I'll mess around with it some more on friday and try to figure out why I lost so much fp from fighting gunners with a saber. It could be the slower fp gain you have set there too. Correct me if I'm wrong, but with that lower fp gain setting, doesn't fp go down from running too with that setting?

[razorace]

Actually FP doesn't go down from running, which was a compromise that I made with a previous design partner. Good call ytmh!

[razorace]

Ok, I've implimented the volley suggestions you made so that players do a slow bounce instead of a stun @ 50+ DP and instead of a knockdown @ 50+ FP.

 

This does dramatically change the pacing of the battle as the saber blows attack/defense transition are much faster. I also like the fact that you can get a good idea of how much DP/FP your opponent has based on which mishaps occur to him. Good so far.

 

However, the saber battles do seem to be over much faster since the action is faster. My guess is that the fights last a little bit longer than MB2 saber battles, but are shorter than the previous versions of Enhanced. As such, I think we might need to increase the DP/FP reserve size, decrease DP/FP costs, or maybe both.

 

Anyway, time permitting, I'll release a new version of Enhanced including all the latest improvements for weekly Enhanced run on the server this friday.

[JRHockney*]

Wow, that was fast! Based on what I have learned of coding so far, I figured it wouldn't take too long (probably a few variable switches and some new or modified boolian formulas that I couldn't figure out right now to save my life! LOL). Good job, I can hardly wait to try it.

 

However, the saber battles do seem to be over much faster since the action is faster. My guess is that the fights last a little bit longer than MB2 saber battles, but are shorter than the previous versions of Enhanced. As such, I think we might need to increase the DP/FP reserve size, decrease DP/FP costs, or maybe both.

 

Believe it or not, I was thinking the exact same thing when I was visualizing this! But I think forgot mention it before in my writing; I'll have to re-read it. I was worried about the length of the dual and how quickly the the block points would get to below 50. I think both the DP/FP point values should be modified, but use your best judgment on how much since you have immediate access to the changed gameplay and we'll (the game players) give our opinions or look for potential problems after the next realize on friday.

 

Also, keep in mind that once players start getting good at your saber system, the duals will be extended because of the the back and forth hit trading. While a fight with a noob on MB can last hardly any time 3-10 seconds, two vets fighting can take 1-4 minutes. I had a 3 minute long fight with a MB staff member a few nights ago.

 

You are on your way to creating a truly KILLER saber system and I hope Raven takes notice of what a good saber system really is, based on your's and MB's.

 

I think one of the next steps to take down the road will be to create a few new difficult to do exploits within the saber combat and give a few extra options of what to do and how to fight. I'll keep my imagination open.

 

Much further down the road, I think there should be effort put forth to make the five+ primary saber combat styles have characteristics of the 7+ known saber styles in starwars "folklore."

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightsaber_combat

 

This could be done by changing certain values in attack, defense, jumping, singlesaberstaff, sabersaberdual, etc. It may also require a few animation changes in certain styles for the sake of distintiveness. You could probably use parts of Moviestances 2.0 and the theatrics animation mod for ForcemodIII to save some time with animations.

 

....and yes this would be alot of work and brain storming on how to keep all the styles balanced. Heck, if you really wanted to set your self apart from everybody (including ForcemodIII because they have seven styles for single) trying to make a version of ALL these saber styles on the link above!!! Wow what a work load that would be.

 

The reason I suggest this idea is because there have been many, MANY threads at the MB site asking for this and discussing this, and the MB staff doesn't seem to want to do it (because the the work involved and their lack of coders {last time I checked}) Doing this may give everyone (who is use to a certain sabersystem, base or MB wise, and doesn't like change) more incentive to try your system.

[razorace]

Well, I'll admit up front that I'm not a fan of the 7 forms theory of lightsaber combat. I personally think that it was invented simply to ease the mind of some fans that think that lightsaber combat is more a formalized martial art like real world stuff.

 

Instead, I feel that lightsaber combat is more a personal reflection of a jedi's connection to the Force. This seems to be reflected in the movies more than the 7 forms theory.

 

However, I agree that the individual styles should have slightly different attributes to them to make them be bit different and more realistic. I'm open to suggestions.

[JRHockney*]

Wow, that was a quick response. I agree that it probably was as you say:

 

to ease the mind of some fans that think that lightsaber combat is more a formalized martial art like real world stuff.

 

But it still is a very popular concept amount JA and Knights of the old public players.

 

Anyways, I'll keep thinking about possibilities on how they can be different. But I did have one quick idea that is not very well thought out yet. Make two different styles of each of the 5 forms, one based on offense and the other on defense. The offense version would be a little quicker in swings, have a few extra flips in the swing animations and have less DP but maybe more FP. The defensive version would be a little bit slower, more DP, and normal animations. Naturally, both versions red and desanns styles would be slower and stronger than both versions of yellow, blue and tavions.

 

Also, allow each player to only choose 3 or 4 of these styles!!! This would allow for specialization among players and balance issues could be excused by bad choice of forms! lol. Heck, you could even create a saber only game mode or a special edition to holocron where you can earn extra styles to use in a particular game.

 

As far as changing animations for the quicker versions, there are plenty of animation replacements to choose from that are already apart of other mods to make the quicker style look cool. For example:

 

http://www.pcgamemods.com/mod/13578.html

 

Check out the animation replacement for tavions style for this when you have time (if you already haven't). It is one of my all time favorites because it remains me on fencing and is unique in that fashion.

 

Like I said, I haven't given too much that to this particular idea yet so let me know what you think or how possible it is. I'm too tired to think right now! lol. Nap time.

[razorace]

I remember discussing the possibility of having a Offensive/Defensive mode to the saber styles but I think we dropped it after we realized that we were over complicating the system when we could have that back/forth action without needing seperate modes.

 

As for most animation mods, they're kind of hacky as they don't have all the proper transitions animations.

[razorace]

Hmmm, actually, the current "issue" appears to been when two players just come at each other swinging like mad men. Right now, attack-on-attack mishaps are pretty rare so they can just spam attack each other for quite a while. I don't think that's really what we want but I'm not sure what to do about it yet. My guess is that we're going to have to add much larger mishaps to start the initial back/forth position.

[JRHockney*]

I remember discussing the possibility of having a Offensive/Defensive mode to the saber styles but I think we dropped it after we realized that we were over complicating the system when we could have that back/forth action without needing seperate modes.

 

As for most animation mods, they're kind of hacky as they don't have all the proper transitions animations.

 

Interesting, I just figured some people would want the option of their favorite style being more offensive or defensive but it would make things more complicated.

 

And youre right about those animation mods being buggy and I now think I recall Keshire not liking them because they arent very well done in that fashion. Most of them are just replacements using pre-existing animations and they do lack alot of transitions. They are still fut o use on ocasion though, I still use Moviestances 2.0 for movie battles.

 

Hmmm, actually, the current "issue" appears to been when two players just come at each other swinging like mad men. Right now, attack-on-attack mishaps are pretty rare so they can just spam attack each other for quite a while. I don't think that's really what we want but I'm not sure what to do about it yet. My guess is that we're going to have to add much larger mishaps to start the initial back/forth position.

 

Hmmmm, are these testers familiar with how the saber system works really well? If they are, they are probably thinking very quickly and trying to figureout and what direction to move into. Remember, this is very new to them and no one's a pro yet. They could also just like the way the constant swinging and defending looks (like I am with a TAB BOT) and getting caught up in the moment because of how movielike it looks compard to other systems. In the movies, the speed at which they swing at eachother could also be considered spamming but they are really thinking very fast, just like in this system.

 

I say, make sure they know the rules of the saber system and give it more time for them to learn how to fight with the changes. Or let me at em!!!! I'll show them how to really fight OJP style!!! LOL.

 

As far as options are concerned, I suppose you could implement some kind of power swing that would disarm a swing spammer once they start getting below a certain FP level because they would get low on it after too many swings.

 

Wait, I've got it! Male the penalty for getting hit while trying to kick less! If a person gets hit while they are trying to kick, they only lose a few DP rather than having their dodge activated! I know its kind of like the MB saber malee, but having kick with all styles was kind of like that before anyway. Hopefully this won't result in too much kicking.

 

If the problem really is just lack of knowledge of this saber system, maybe you and I should fight tomarrow and see how it ends up. I can probably be online anytime after 4 pm mountain time.

[JRHockney*]

Oh wait a minute, I think I see what youre saying. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this could be the swing blocking I was talking about when I fight the Tabbots. they both swing, but no mishap happens and no DP is drained because the the sabers are just colliding. Maybe this these guys have learned this and are doing what they can to prevent DP loss. Well, thats one way of making the fights longer! lol. Remember my swing parrying idea about using the ALT ATTACK button to turn an attacking in to a defensive parrying? Although I'm aware of the problems you stated with it before, this might be a good remedy.

 

I could be wrong in all may presumptions here so you might have to clarify whats happening a bit more.

[razorace]

Wait, I've got it! Male the penalty for getting hit while trying to kick less! If a person gets hit while they are trying to kick, they only lose a few DP rather than having their dodge activated! I know its kind of like the MB saber malee, but having kick with all styles was kind of like that before anyway. Hopefully this won't result in too much kicking.

wha? I'm not really sure what this would accomplish.

 

As for the swinging spamming, after some additional time playing with the system, I'm thinking that maybe I was just over worrying about the problem. From what I can tell, the spamming only occurs if the players are only hitting saber-on-saber in the first place.

 

I also slightly increased the block animaiton times to make them a touch more obvious (and that seems to have helped with the attack spamming).

 

Also, based on the amount of negative feedback on the attack fake starts, I thinking that we might we want to go back to the old style system of using !attack + alt_attack.

[JRHockney*]

Forget what I said in the first response, I misunderstood what was going on and miss diagnoised the problem. DOH! (sobbing) I'm a bad doctor! I also wrote it right after I got up from my nap.

 

I also slightly increased the block animaiton times to make them a touch more obvious (and that seems to have helped with the attack spamming).

 

Good idea, especially if it doesn't slow down the action by much.

 

Also, based on the amount of negative feedback on the attack fake starts, I thinking that we might we want to go back to the old style system of using !attack + alt_attack.

 

Honestly, thats probably a good idea. I often end up kicking first rather than faking and entering dodge as the saber passes through my kick.

[razorace]

Well, I'm referring to the fakes you can perform now by simply not holding down the attack button.

 

Also, in other news, I'm adding new saber effects to make them more like the moves. For now, I'm altering the saber-on-saber clash effect.

[JRHockney*]

Well, I've been playing around with it for a while, and I must say its alot of fun to watch and the action is much better. I've already heard a few people say that they like it alot more than before and I haven't heard any complaints. So its going over pretty well so far I would say.

 

Great saber flashes! Very movie like. It might make the combat a little more intense if they were just a little bit bigger or maybe brighter..... but then again it may interfere with concentration. Might be worth a try though.

 

There are a few issues I've noticed with the game and gameplay though:

 

1. For some reason, the FFA map on the meatgrinder keeps crashing after a few minutes of play. I'm pretty sure it was the server because It wouldn't come back up for a little bit and when it did, it was a different map. I only seemed to hapen when actual people join and played for a while.

 

2. There is still some disarming going on long before I reach 50- FP or even DP and this even happens when I use a stronger style (but so far, no premature stuns, which is a good sign).

 

3. Hit detection could use some improvement. The bouncing effect also does not seem as strong as it use to be, but this could just be my imagination because of the block freezes. Its too bad the block animations don't have more frames in the draw back.

 

4. I wonder if using Keshire's block animations would look better with this. He's always been very proud of them and I've always wanted to see those in action.

 

Overall, Great accomplishment for such a short period of time. I sure the combat will become alot more solid in the next versions. I love that fact that I have to think alot quicker now. Its all about watching the other guy's saber and movements.

 

Question: Is it technically possible to make the first person perspective more of a panoramic? It might help to get a better overall view of the swings, but it sounds like it would be hard, if not impossible to implement.

[razorace]

Well, I've been playing around with it for a while, and I must say its alot of fun to watch and the action is much better.

Good!

 

Great saber flashes! Very movie like. It might make the combat a little more intense if they were just a little bit bigger or maybe brighter..... but then again it may interfere with concentration. Might be worth a try though.

I think they're fairly movie realistic as is. I think I'll wait on more feedback on it before changing it as I don't want it to be distracting.

 

1. For some reason, the FFA map on the meatgrinder keeps crashing after a few minutes of play.

I'll keep an eye on it. thanks for the heads up.

 

2. There is still some disarming going on long before I reach 50- FP or even DP and this even happens when I use a stronger style (but so far, no premature stuns, which is a good sign).

Yeah, I know. I didn't block that behavior yet but it looks like it really needs to be done as well. Plus, I think the disarm percentages need to be nerfed a bit.

 

3. Hit detection could use some improvement. The bouncing effect also does not seem as strong as it use to be, but this could just be my imagination because of the block freezes. Its too bad the block animations don't have more frames in the draw back.

I know that the hit detection isn't perfect, but I'm at the end of options that are fairly easy to do. I could try some other things but I'm not sure how successfull it would be AND it would really change the way the code runs.

 

4. I wonder if using Keshire's block animations would look better with this. He's always been very proud of them and I've always wanted to see those in action.

Yeah, we could try that too. It's just a hassle to add that many animations to the mix. Plus, the last time we tried it it wasn't as successful as I had hoped.

 

Question: Is it technically possible to make the first person perspective more of a panoramic? It might help to get a better overall view of the swings, but it sounds like it would be hard, if not impossible to implement.

With True View, you can change the fov with cg_truefov.

[JRHockney*]

I just had an idea. I've noticed that the hit detection with MB2 is pretty decent when it comes to blocking and even swing blocking and how much the BP gets drained for certain hits. I was thinking that it might be because the blocking is done with only one button and it gives the system less to process. Maybe if you made it simpler to Block/parry, the hit detection would improve and it would be easier to defend against swing spammers (A problem that may develop as more people use this saber system).

 

My idea is this: Make the 4 parry directions (up, down, left, right based on the attack) only 2. I see 2 possibilities for this:

 

1. Parrying works with just the up (w) and down (s) keys. Up for parrying up-left, up, and up-right swings and down for side swings and down-left/right swings (or have it inverted like it is).

 

2. Have parrying up swings (straight down slice) as deflaut (no direction) and all swings to the to the right or left perried by moving in to them with the right (d) and left (a).

 

Since the action is now moving alot faster with this build (as it should), I figure that having a slightly simpler defense system might be easier on the players (to block multiple swings) and on the hit detection. I doubt this would help the hit detection as much as changing the animations or code in general as we talked about, but I think this would take much less time to change.

 

Of course, if this really did help the hit detection and make it too easy to defend, we may have to come up with another way to break through the defense or just tell people to fake alot more.

[razorace]

Well, part of the reason that the blocks aren't as "accurate" is due to me using the bounding box instead of the actual player model for the area at which the players block saber attacks. I did this to help with the illusion of sabers not passing thru player's bodies unless the swing actually hits the player for damage. However, the actual player models are still used for damage hit detection. Unfortunately, we have a limited amount of block animations that we can use for blocking incoming attacks. We could add in Keshire's block positions, but we can get to that in due time.

 

As for MB2's saber system, I'm not familar with what they internally after the cooperative split. I have a copy of the MB2 source from when Phunk moved on to other projects but I honestly haven't messed with it. Unfortunately, untagged code is very hard to port features. (Plus, I'm not into the mod porting business much anymore anyway. I got hellish, unorganized porting work dumped on me one too many times.)

 

As for the parrying, that's the way the system currently works. IE, up-left attack can be blocked by any move made within one direction position of it (left, up, and left/up).