razorace Posted May 8, 2007 Share Posted May 8, 2007 I agree. Death in JKA is basically the equivilent of being "taken out of the fight" in the movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRHockney* Posted May 8, 2007 Author Share Posted May 8, 2007 Hmm, maybe for realism sake we can make it so that if you get "HPed" You lose your saber and can't run or jump for a bit. That way, you technically lose a fight like you would in the movies and your opponent can show mercy on you or kill you...or say "JOIN ME!!" The only problem would be that you wouldn't be able to play with no dodge on...though we could make an exception for that too pretty easily through code. Also if we do this, we might want to make the points added with the intial HPing and intial HPing and not during the time when your can't get your saber back. Heck, if we do this, we might even score points with the worried parents everywhere andthe headlines will read "OJP Promotes Non-violent solutions in Mods!!!!!! ROFL! EDIT: actually, we might just want to make that a cvar if we do it since it might have a negative effect of siege or other gametypes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted May 8, 2007 Share Posted May 8, 2007 hmmm, interesting idea, may or may not be hard to impliment. But is that something we'd actually be interested in doing? Seems pretty LARPy to me.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRHockney* Posted May 9, 2007 Author Share Posted May 9, 2007 hmmm, interesting idea, may or may not be hard to impliment. But is that something we'd actually be interested in doing? Seems pretty LARPy to me.... Wow, I had no idea what LARPY even mean until I just looked it up I don't know, it sounds like a pretty good idea to me. What does everybody else think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxstate Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Live Action Role Playing! Basically going to the woods with your friends dressed as D&D characters, throwing acorns at them and saying "Lightning bolt!". What do I think about losing your saber at low HP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRHockney* Posted May 9, 2007 Author Share Posted May 9, 2007 What do I think about losing your saber at low HP? No, when you get "hped" because you didnt have enough DP to block teh hit. It hould kill you but it doesn't. You'd lose your saber and not be able to run or jump for a bit. THis way, the winner could how mercy if he want Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxstate Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Ohhh! (durr) Sure, I'd rather they slowbounce so I can disarm them myself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShaman Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Well, the thing is... that would happen when you hit in leg/foot or arm/hand, right? So you slice through the leg (graphically, no dismemberment, since the victim is alive), he can't move for a while, and then can run and bunnyhop again? The only way to make it really realistic would be to make difference between a slice through the limb and a slice just a bit on it, but I heavily doubt Q3 engine can handle this... alas... So maybe a ingame death would be the best "fighter taken out of the fight" in fact... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Yeah, it might be best the way it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted May 12, 2007 Share Posted May 12, 2007 New topic. I'm working with Max on working on a way to balance out the saber animation speeds. Right now I'm trying the following... attacks = .5 secs starts (windups) = .25 secs returns = .5 secs transitions = .125 - .5 secs (depends on the size of the position shift) - In theory, this should allow parriers to be able to launch an attack before the attacker has a chance to recover. Assuming that the parry animation isn't much slower than the bounce animation. IE defender = parry + transition + attack = parry + (.125-.5) +.5 = parry + (.625-1.125) should be faster than... attacker = bounce + return + start + attack = bounce + .5 + .125 + .5 = bounce + 1.125 - Spin transitions probably need to be slowed down to .5 no matter what. I've noticed that .125 secs is just too fast for a spin. This will translate to styles with more spin moves being at an disadvantage to non-spinny one. - I've already started to do this with the blue, yellow, red to see how it affects things. I'll let you guys know what I discover. What do you guys think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UDM Posted May 12, 2007 Share Posted May 12, 2007 Sounds good on paper, but personally, I think it'd be better if we tested it out ingame first Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxstate Posted May 12, 2007 Share Posted May 12, 2007 Just give me a legend of things to do and I'll do them, but I hope you're taking in account the time struggle I'm going to have soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShaman Posted May 12, 2007 Share Posted May 12, 2007 This looks very good to me, but shouldn't it be different values for each style? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted May 12, 2007 Share Posted May 12, 2007 Just give me a legend of things to do and I'll do them, but I hope you're taking in account the time struggle I'm going to have soon. attacks = .5 secs starts (windups) = .25 secs (this might need to be .5 secs) returns = .5 secs transitions = 1 quad shift (example T_TR) = .125 2 quad shift (example T__R) = .25 3 quad shift (example T_BR) = .375 4 quad shift (example L__R) = .5 This is probably just the basic modifications. Some moves, like spins, might need to be modified to look correctly. I suggest that we just focus on shifting everything to the "standard" first and then worry about moves that don't look right. I'm alright working on "base" styles (red, yellow, blue). IE animation levels 1,2,3. You can focus on the other styles. WARNING: I've moved the animation defines around a lot so you're going to want to move any modifications you haven't committed to a backup file before performing a SVN update. After that, you will have to manually move your modifications into the updated animation.cfg. This looks very good to me, but shouldn't it be different values for each style? I'm saying no. The player should be moving the same speed no matter which style they are using. However, it might turn out that the more sweeping styles might need to be slowed down a touch to have comparable blade movement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShaman Posted May 13, 2007 Share Posted May 13, 2007 Allright, that will make style balancing easier, since it's one less thing to take in account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxstate Posted May 13, 2007 Share Posted May 13, 2007 Alright I'll get started on SVN redownloading and such tonight and hopefully we can do a few of these together when you have time so I'm certain not to make any mistakes.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted May 15, 2007 Share Posted May 15, 2007 Ok, task completed. I've also standardized the parry animations to last .25 seconds. It seems to work well, but it also makes them look like a blur of movement. That could be good or bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted May 16, 2007 Share Posted May 16, 2007 What do you guys think about removing the traditional slow bounces and making parries result in the attacker making a slower bounce/return? While I like the current system, the slow bounces do look a bit artifical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxstate Posted May 16, 2007 Share Posted May 16, 2007 A slower bounce? What do you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShaman Posted May 16, 2007 Share Posted May 16, 2007 Well I'm not sure of understanding. Does this mean that when the attacker suffers a slowbounce, instead of being frozen a while and then returning, he would not freeze but return even slower instead? Alright, this looks fine to me, could be an improvement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted May 16, 2007 Share Posted May 16, 2007 Ok, the current behavior for parried attackers is a bounce animation, followed by a forced return-to-stance animation. These occur at the normal animation speeds. My suggestion is that make that particular bounce and return move a bit slower to get the defender a chance to switch to attacking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxstate Posted May 16, 2007 Share Posted May 16, 2007 Hmm I use slowbounces to try and disarm my opponents, if this will help that goal then I'm all in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRHockney* Posted May 16, 2007 Author Share Posted May 16, 2007 I'm for slowing down the return animation after you get parried, but as far as getting rid of the normal slowbounces from attack parries, only if we replace it with something that looks better, (and this ONLY applies to the normal slowbounces and NOT the heavybounces) IF we make it the stumble animation which would look less artificial, I think we should slow it down to the speed of our present slowbounce and make it so that your aren't vulnerable to force in it (or Spam City here we come) and make sure its not in the mishap maxout roll (which should be only knockdown anyways from my code but I noticed that its still a roll). Only then am I in favor of this part of it... unless you have another less artificial animation in mind to replace the slowbounce. While slowbounces may not be that pretty looking right now, the concept of what they accomplish I believe is an ESSENTIAL part of defense in our saber system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShaman Posted May 17, 2007 Share Posted May 17, 2007 I'm with you Razor. This looks pretty good. But does this apply to all parries? or attack parries only? (I think that getting parried doesn't cause slowbounce, does it? Only a forced mishap with a bit of MP makes a slow bounce, right?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRHockney* Posted May 18, 2007 Author Share Posted May 18, 2007 Ya know, after think about it a bit, I'm not so sure these longer rebound times are a good idea because it might overpower defense a bit. With the new mishap values for parrying and the fact that you can learn to attack parry without too much trouble, its already possible to mount a pretty solid defense. In fact, the parry system right now allows for the attackers mishap meter to go up fast if their parried several times in a row. If theres too much of a break after getting parried, I'm worried that the attacker would stop his agressiveness and not get their meter up. Also, there might be less over all mishap flucuation because they would be going back and forth parry each other. But then again the back and forth action might not be such a bad thing. I don't know, this could very easily be a pretty good, or a really bad thing to happen to our system. I'm just worried aboiut spoiling our current balance because its soo good right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.