Saber system suggestions

[Vruki Salet]

kick should have its own button

 

Yeah yeah! 2 thumbs up etc etc. That's a great idea. Especially for clumsy slow-fingered geezers like me who can't do attack fakes or other alt-fire-combo special moves without kicking by accident and looking stupid.

[Sushi_CW]

From what I understand, blocking animations currently kick in whenever the player's body is hit, and if the player has enough DP, the saber bounces off just like it hit a saber. At the same time, the player goes into the proper block animation. Have I understood that correctly?

 

If so, how feasible would it be to make it so that the player goes into block position a bit before the swing hits? The idea would be to make the visual effect more convincing, so that it looks a bit more like the defender blocked the attacking saber instead of having it bounce off his body then move into attack position. I've noticed that if the hit lands on the side the saber already is (if it's already blocking that side, for example) the effect looks great. However, if the hit lands where the saber isn't (and is triggered by hitting the player instead of the saber) it doesn't look quite as convincing. If the player could be forced to put the saber in block position before the attacking saber gets to where the blocking saber would be, the effect would look much better.

 

This could potentially be done in a couple of ways:

1. Create a second collision box around the player that would put the player into a block animation.

2. Predict the position of the swinging saber a frame or two ahead. For the effect to be convincing, all we need is for the block to be in position before the saber gets to it.

 

I hope I'm making sense...if not, I could provide pictures. And, I recognize that what I'm thinking of may or may not be really practical. Just thought I'd throw it out there...

[Vruki Salet]

I've considered these too, or almost since I was just thinking of an enlarged player collision box instead of a second one. I like your idea. Or else, and I got this idea from looking at the code though I don't know if I really understood what I was looking at, how about having one check to see if the saber hit the collision box for a pre-hit detector that sets off an autoblock and then another check against the actual polys of the model to detect 'real' hits. That would be like your first idea but with one bounding box and then the model itself.

[razorace]

An earlier version of OJP used a method sort of like that.

 

However, it's not as easy as it sounds since you gotta do in in a way that doesn't constantly interrupt swings due to someone's saber getting remotely close to someone's body.

 

The current system uses a thin box around the player for their saber blocking "area". The problem is that it only works at the time of impact, rather than milliseconds beforehand. I'm planning on working on that issue somemore after I've reworked the mishap system.

[UDM]

Well I'm not fond of coding in any way, so I'll just offer you guys moral support! Go for it! Don't give up! and all that crap

 

(looking at C gives me migraines for a week. Visual Basic at least I can comprehend since it's...well a bunch of compiled scripts...)

[Vruki Salet]

What about the second idea? Predicting the location of the saber in the next frame based upon its difference between the last frame and the current frame. It wouldn't always be perfect, like if the saber makes a quick direction change, but it might be useful.

[razorace]

Actually, the code already does that to prevent false positives in the blocks.

[Vruki Salet]

Could you point out where? Is it your code or raven's?

[razorace]

It's in OJP_SaberCanBlock I think.

[Vruki Salet]

Oh shucks I'm working with only the Basic code right now. But I'll take a look at it anyway for fun and learning.

[JRHockney*]

Alright, several of us have the new beta, so its time for a first review.

 

Overall, I'm still not sure that this is a good idea, but with certain modifications it might be workable. On the positive side, the combat is very cool to watch and the most movielike its been yet. Unfortunately, there are several things that I think are more negative than anything:

 

1. the combat seems more swing spammy than it has before and I can only beat tabbots by swinging endlessly at them. Basically, it is very hard to play defensively in this in this version.

 

2. The combat is less dynamic than it has been before because all the mishaps including the slow bounces dont happen nearly as often. This means that there is less variety visually. I'm not entirely sure that this is too big of a problem, but it does kind of lessen the dynamics of the fight.

 

3. Its nearly impossible to tell what your opponents DP is since the mishaps are no longer progressive based on the opponents DP.

 

4. Theres another meter to watch! We're turning into airline pilots here! LOL. This isnt that big of a deal and I dont mind it too much, but it might scare away new players.

 

5. This is the biggest problem I see. In order to get a person to a higher mishap, you have to GET HIT or maybe attack fake alot since slowbounces resent your opponents meter. This makes higher mishaps extremely rare and the combat less dynamic. We need to do something about this if we are going to keep this part of the system. I also miss attack parries (as long as they arnt vulnerable to force at high DP) and attack fakes causing mishaps at low DP. Maybe at lower DP, the bigger mishaps happen lower on the meter or moves that make your mishap meter go up are more costly to the mishap meter.

 

Well those are the primary problems I see with this idea and I can't honestly say I like the combat better than I did at the code server. There are things we could do to make it better such as having the meter not resent for nearly as far or for a regular slow bounce, but it would still be less dynamic than it was before. If this idea doesnt end up working for us we could always try that idea to make the slowbounces more like reversals like we had talked about.

 

Razor, it might be a good idea list what does what point wise to the mishap meter so we have a solid reference to look at when we try to solve some of these issues.

 

On another positive note, I played with no dodge and the saberclashmod (this makes it look alot cooler, but I would recommend using an archiver to get rid of the stupid sounds in it.) on and this system was very playable with the lesser mishaps, even though it still had alot of the problems I listed above.

 

 

I also just had an interesting idea for a new mode:

 

It would be like a pro mode where all unparried hits do a ton of DP damage, but you can parry in any situation (including swinging) except a big mishap (knockdown, disarm, etc.) and parries cost no DP. This might work pretty well with the new system too. I'd say its at least worth a shot

[UDM]

I'm busy mugging Maths right now, so I'll just post a quick reply, followed by a detailed one tomorrow

 

I think the whole saber combat needs balancing. Yellow and purple in particular are weak. Yellow is the second fastest, but its range is short, therefore it can't really hit anything. It is also weak at comboing, well at least from my experience. And with the inability to parry saber fakes now, yellow is well...given a huge disadvantage. Purple is slow, an even more pathetic range and I don't think I've ever killed anyone with purple before because it can't seem to break their defences

 

IMHO best stance is red. I've won 4 consecutive matches against bots. Red is sheer aggression at its best, there's no doubt about it. So far, it seems like aggression is the way to go. By aggression, I don't mean on an all out offence. You could be defending aggressively, using blue to combo all the way while the enemy stupidly tries to hack away. Why is red the best imho right now? I guess it's because of the range. When I use red, I am always able to strike better from a further distance, and the enemy dodges more often. So aggressive is it, that the blocking can almost be negated because it happens automatically when you force your saber into their attacks

 

On the sidenote, I like the speed of saber combat now. Sure there are less bounces and all, but I think it's best to keep it that way. Previous versions (esp the earlier ones) were too draggy, you could take forever to fight. I like how Razor made bounces and all rarer, turning them into "cool moments" when they do happen

 

I'm off now, but I'll be back in a while to post more

[Aragil]

Hmm.. Just an idea, but why not implement the actual Star Wars saber styles into the game? I think it would be a lot more interesting than everyone fighting a single way. You could make separate systems for all 7, and if you can balance them appropriately, I would definitely give this mod a try.

[UDM]

We've talked about this before, but I don't think this will be implemented, at least not in the current situation. There are a few reasons for this. Firstly, the saber forms are still highly controversised about; there's a lot of overlapping between styles and saber types. Secondly, we are short of animators at the moment

 

Saber styles are more or less preferential at the moment, but they still have their advantages. Having 7 styles would be a little...overkill. But certainly, a lot of them already resemble the Star Wars styles, if with a little overlapping. For example, Aqua can be called Soresu, as it is the most defensive style so far, and is the fastest too. And if I'm not wrong, Red should be Shien. Makashi perhaps when you only have the saber on the left hand, for dual sabers. And Juyo of course is the staff's. There is overlapping too of course. Shii-Cho is probably a mix between blue and Yellow, depending on how you use it, since it's the newbie stance. So it's almost impossible to really balance gameplay if you just base the fighting on the Star Wars styles, but imho the current system is as close to it as it gets

 

You guys are free to debate about the above btw

[Tapela]

I've always not liked the idea of including "movie styles" into the game. First and foremost is the balance, second the animation problems and third I've always just kind of prefered styles over having them have some kind of stats or advantages that are too much. We all know what happens when something is too advantageous from base Jedi Outcast. That is why something can't be too much of an advantage or people will just do that over and over and the game gets repetitive and dull. Like when turtling was pretty bad .

[JRHockney*]

I've always not liked the idea of including "movie styles" into the game. First and foremost is the balance, second the animation problems and third I've always just kind of prefered styles over having them have some kind of stats or advantages that are too much. We all know what happens when something is too advantageous from base Jedi Outcast. That is why something can't be too much of an advantage or people will just do that over and over and the game gets repetitive and dull. Like when turtling was pretty bad .

 

Maxstates saber anims help make the styles coolers looking. He's away at the moment but I'll send you a copy if you want.

[Vruki Salet]

May I take a look at those anims?

[JRHockney*]

May I take a look at those anims?

sure, just send me your email. I'll also send a link to the most recent enhanced beta. We could use your server for testing.

[Vruki Salet]

OK send it to

 

vruki

salet

@

lycos

.

com

 

without, of course, the newlines.

 

I'll put a server up when I get the files and keep it going until I find the blank CDs I need to install Linux. Then I'll need to shut it down for a while when I reboot and install that OS.

[JRHockney*]

OK send it to

 

vruki

salet

@

lycos

.

com

 

without, of course, the newlines.

 

I'll put a server up when I get the files and keep it going until I find the blank CDs I need to install Linux. Then I'll need to shut it down for a while when I reboot and install that OS.

 

Ok, I just sent them via email. I'll also PM the link to the new Enhanced beta (not an offiecail release) if you want to host it on your server.

[Vruki Salet]

The server should be available now at 72.224.187.170. I don't think it has any special name to help find it on the list just whatever's default. Maybe I'll make it fancier later like MOTD and all that. But I'm going to bed after I check the server out for a minute.

[JRHockney*]

Ok Razor, I have some sad news to report. Jack mentioned that he thought he could parry any bot in this version by pressing back and I told him to test again because we've already fixed that problem. Well, he did and got the same result. So I decided to try it on Tapela and sushi, and it worked!!!

 

Thats right. The dreaded universal back block has returned! It was able to parry all swings from all direction except lunges. You know what this means: we have to do that damn break point test again or you need to check the code and see if anythings been changed.

 

Btw, heres my old idea for new saber locks that you had forgotten today

 

 

1. First, make all saber locks happen in default view.

2. Make the locks only lock in what ever place it started (this will distinguish it from the disarm move).

3. Any attempted swing will break it, including alt attacks. Whoever swings first will swing and look like he broke the anim. If this doesnt work, we can use the parry anim.

4. There are a few different types of saber lock anims right? Make each type of saber lock anim will get a certain alt attack with certain directon pressed combination that causes a knocked back or knock down depending on the losers DP. It will be based on whoever does it first. If both people press the right combo at the same time, they both get knocked back.

 

you responded with:

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by razorace

Hmmm, that's an interesting idea. Maybe the move should just be to attack+move in the opposite direction of the saber lock. So, if your in a saber lock with the saber on the left, you'd press right+attack to win the move?

 

Then I with:

 

Wow, if that can be done, that could be even better. I had thought the same thing, but I was afraid of how much work it would end up being, but...great! It would probably be just hard enough to see what direction you have to press in time before the lock is broken to make it fairly rare as it should be. Although if it turns out to be too easy, we might have to rethink it a bit.

Its nice to finally have an good original move addition idea again. Its been a while for me.

[UDM]

Is it possible to strengthen the power of a saber lock per click on the attack button? So saber locks become fast affairs like KOTOR's anims. They just lock sabers for less than 4 seconds

 

The one thing I never got about a long saber lock is, why do I have to actually push the guy's saber down before I can strike him? Why not trick him by pushing in with lots of strength, then suddenly break out of the lock, releasing the tension on to him, and then strike him? lol

 

Btw I think before we move on, we really have to fix saber locks first. At the current state, not only do the saber lock losers not suffer dodge damage, they get an attack advantage too =\

[Sushi_CW]

The new version is a blast, lots of fun to play. Here's my feedback/suggestions:

 

1) Making parries NOT automatically cause bounces seems like a solid change to me. The combat is much faster now. The only disadvantage is that it is hard to get feedback: you can never quite be sure if you landed a parry right or not. Vruki and I were thinking: what if we included some audio feedback? The idea would be that you get one sound if it's a block and another sound if it's a parry. (If this is already in place, shoot me! )

 

2) I would really, really like it if it was possible to parry in slowbounce, both lunges and normal swings. Especially with the attack parry being what it is, it would be very helpful and soothe a lot of frustrations for players. At least me.

 

3) Attack parries... I've never liked them. Ever. Still don't. What bugs me most about them is their "shortcut" nature. If we're going to move to the mishap bar, why have something that allows you to cause slowbounces no matter what the attacker's mishap bar looks like?

 

4) I have mixed feelings about the mishap bar. On the positive side, I like that mishaps are now less predictable without being completely random. On the other hand, it's been the source of a lot of frustration. My biggest peeve is that it penalizes aggressive players. The fact that ANY landed hit causes the mishap bar to go up means that the defender has to do absolutely nothing to cause a mishap on the attacker except eat hits. The worst part is that it penalizes successful aggressors as much as unsuccessful ones. If I land a 7-hit combo without getting parried, I should be causing mishaps, not receiving them. What I'd like to see is the mishap bar go up only when the attacker gets parried. If the attacker lands an unparried hit, I don't think his mishap bar should climb. If the defender wants the attacker to slowbounce, he'd have to work for it.

 

5) In the current version, getting slowbounced doesn't make the mishap bar go back down to 0 like getting disarmed or stunned does. I think it would be better if it did: slowbounces are dangerous enough already, and the fact that a slowbounce mishap doesn't even give you the benefit of a fresh mishap meter just makes it worse. I would rather get a stun or a knockdown and a fresh reset meter any day, and in recent fights I've actually tried to max out my meter so that I get those mishaps (and reset my meter) rather than risk a slowbounce (and only get it half reset).

 

6) Attack fakes are a bit frustrating right now. The fact that they are unparryable AND actually reduce your mishap meter lead me to fear that they are going to be spammed to high heaven. Why would you use anything else? I'm in favor of letting them simply be a way to change attack direction midswing, with no other differences from normal swings. I don't think we will need them as "parrybreakers" anymore under the new system, since parries no longer automatically cause bounces.

 

7) I still like the idea of the mishap bar going down slowly. It certainly would be more realistic, and would mean that three parries in a row cause more mishap-age on the attacker than three parries spaced out over 20 seconds. If we'd need to increase the mishap bar penalty for being parried, so be it. It would also help prevent the awkward situation of winning one fight with a full mishap meter, walking around for 2 minutes, and entering the next fight with your mishap meter still full because you forgot to medidate it down.

 

I hope I haven't come across as overly critical. I definitely appreciate the work being done by Razor and have a blast and a half playing it. I just want to give as much feedback as I can.

[JackBaldy]

Yo Hockney, that is kinda wierd, in the code server when Tapela and I were practicing attack parrying and parrying in general going backwards didn't block all the attacks... You think it might be a cvar? I am 99.99% sure that going backwards only blocked the appropriate attacks, as did the other movements etc. (at the code server atleast lol)

 

@Sushi: 2) Personally I don't think that would be a good idea, because it is real hard to get someone to slow bounce now that there is a mishap bar, which leads on to my next statement. Sure attack parries may seem like a shortcut to slow bounces, but in reality, they are real difficult to execute and I think the reward does equal the difficulty in this case. About the mishap bar, well, I like it. It doesn't really penalize the attacker per se, seeing as he can use attack fakes to lower the mishap bar, so a smart attacker wouldn't let his mishap bar go too high or he will have to pay for it.

 

Actually, getting slowbounced used to make your meter reset, but razor changed it in the code server and I liked that change, and no one there at the time disagreed. See if the slow bounce bar didn't really affect you much, then it really isn't a gameplay element and it is just a small added feature, but in the current mode, it does affect you and it has gameplay altering things. Makes the system more complex and maybe a bit more difficult, but in the end, it makes it more fun too. And sushi.... attack fakes can be parried... I don't know what you read but my attack fakes got parried quite alot in the code server The mishap going down overtime, depending on how fast it goes, can really make as I said before the mishap bar nothing big, and it should be something big. I think you should just meditate or pay!