Couple of suggestions/? on 1.2

[Ytmh]

Hey there, remember me back when this was called MOTF? Probably not. Anyways!

 

I played the whole saber-block/? system thing waaaaaay back and I've kind of silently kept track of the whole thing (latest releases, what not.) And, y'know, this isn't really bad at all. In fact, it works pretty well. Well, almost.

 

I'm not sure if this has been fixed, so excuse me if it has, I'm using the 1.2 version of enhanced which I got off JK2files so, just in case.

 

There's a really weird issue with the saber/shader/effect? of the cg_moviesabers(?) 3 (default), which makes it have a sort of black glow to it. No, it's not the installation, it's none of that. It's running on a clean install without any mods or anything of that sort. So, what's up with that?

 

Another thing is that in truview when using the max upgraded blaster (where you get 2 of'em) your goddamn hands are in the way so you can't see what you're shooting at! I kind of understand the idea of doing a new position for firing the guns, sure, but... y'know. I'd like to see what I'm shooting at too.

 

Besides these two things, there are a number of other things which I find a little...hm, clumsy. For one, the whole saber system is very complicated on paper and it has tons of tiny little details and variables, but when actually playing the thing it feels very random because it's EXTREMELY difficult to keep track of the 20 things you're supposed to look at.

 

Namely, if you're paying attention to the animations, movements you're supposed to be doing (and timing!) plus the meters on the side and other such things it becomes just very "Well, uh. Doing this works, let's try it again and again." I ignored half the system and managed to beat them bots (and people, though that's relative) left and right no problem. What do I mean? Well, for one the saberlocks unless they were instakill (UGH! More on this later) were completely pointless. I'd just wait a bit and parry what came next, plus everything is pretty quick and it seems random as to who gets stunned and who doesn't (though it isn't random, the visual cues either happen so fast or are more code-than-visual, like most of the system.)

 

Then there are the four thousand parry mechanisms and fakes and what not. I think I didn't even use a fake/attack whatever it's called when you cancel an attack into another (for extra damage, why?) more than once or twice just to see if it was any better than just holding the attack button (didn't it take FP away? Not enough of it to make a difference, at least on 1.2 on XP level 10 to 50, and onwards.) The idea is cool, and all, but can't this be activated some other way? It's just an attack cancel. Fighting games generally handle those by having your next input cancel what came before. In this case, why not do the same? Say pressing attack during the charge-up of a slash but with a different direction redirects it automatically. Plus, why put special effects/emphasis on this? It's just a cancel...

 

On the other hand, I think the perks for the saber stances are a good idea overall, and totally should be focusing on making each stance unique and self-sufficient enough to not need to switch between the stances.

 

But most of the cool stuff gets completely thrown out the window if I'm getting into random-ass saberlocks every 5 seconds, which amount to nothing since they're automatic and it seems random as to who ends up benefiting from one. Also, instakills? Really? Who thought it was a great idea to add an instakill move that is triggered AT RANDOM?

 

Sure sure, I've read the manuals more than four times already and what I'm reading isn't translating to the game very well. I've lurked and saw the more updated versions of the manuals too, but it's not much better. Regardless of what complicated systems you have that trigger them locks, if fake-attacks trigger them at random or under an arbitrary set of parameters you can just throw on of'em every once in a while to see if you win the lottery and score an instakill. Not cool.

 

My suggestion is to get rid of saberlocks, or make them in some way also PART of the gameplay, not just some animation for instakill or tacked on for the sake of using it because it looks cool (I frankly got sick of the automatic saberlock animation after the 60th time it happened...) In this case, baseJKA at least tried to have some sort of gameplay element result in it (Buttonmashing sucked, but it was SOMETHING.)

 

Instakills are just not cool, period. It's a design choice against the overall design direction, really. The whole thing seems to be built towards a skill-oriented fighting game-esque system, it just breaks it to include something that is so difficult to properly control that it becomes just luck as to when it comes out (and it's an automatic win under the right conditions). I would really check my facts on this if the manuals floating around had VERSION NUMBERS ON THEM. Seriously people, can we please name the documents according to what version they're accurate to? But I digress; from the actual gameplay experience I really never picked up anything that seemed to cause them (and I never could tell if I started them or the other players did!)

 

Another complaint I have is having a 4 directional parry, (up down left right) when, really, up and down are used for actually critical moving (backpedal, measuring hit distances, etc) it shouldn't have such an important secondary function that you end up getting hit since you're not sure what takes priority (moving, or parrying.)

 

Plus how does it work with diagonals, since most of the time I was moving in diagonals, so I thought well, the left-back parry directions worked together (or it seemed they did? This isn't documented as far as I could see.)

 

So, I'd just leave left and right, and free up and down for just moving and attack control. Besides, there aren't many direct overhead attacks and those can still be blocked just by .. well, moving out of the goddamn way (sidestepping should be a pretty obvious defense to an overhead slash, right? At least Namco seems to think so...) Plus how do diagonals work in relation to parrying?

 

I think that at this point in the development it'd be a good time to think of simplifying/streamlining the whole saber system, because right now it's a collection of TONS of ideas (including mine, somehow!) and frankly it's not holding up so great. It's a huge improvement, it plays REASONABLY well, and it's pretty fun. But, does it really need so many parrying, etc etc types that really don't seem to carry a lot of weight to them? I had a lot of fun just holding the slash button down and moving around to block/control my attacks and kept using stuff like attack-parries and god knows what just by sheer luck/?

 

And, of course, so did the others I played with once we caught on that you could just hold attack and try to combo again and again, which resulted in luck-parries (a new type of parry!) and just seemingly random saber locks, and all that jazz. If any of us TRIED to use any strategy, it was pretty pointless since the person holding attack and just moving a little around had the advantage of keeping track of only 2 things: Holding the button down and moving around. Oh, holding shift too!

 

Meanwhile the dude trying to do the strategy "I've read the manual, actually." gameplay stuff had so much junk to look at: "How are his arm positions, wait my mishap meter shot up for no reason why did I miss while I was trying to walk into that slash argggg" and so on. It didn't get much better with practice, at least in the couple of days we played. It seemed we only got better at exploiting what worked over and over, like using makashi and doing the hold slash+simple walk thing. Really annoying to know your opponent is pulling of supposedly skill-based stuff totally out of luck! Unless you're doing it too!

 

Please correct me if I'm wrong on any of this, but this is just the overall impression I had after some careful observation. There's probably more stuff, but I'd really need to dedicate a lot more time to this and I don't have much of that.

 

Oh, another thing. Consider putting the FP, DP, etc meters directly on the bottom. It got old real fast having to see that info on the bottom corner since it's pretty critical. Any critical information is probably best placed nearest to where you'll be looking at the most without obstructing the view. Or at least make it a toggle. I'd pretty much redesign the HUD some but well. Those are pretty old ideas. :>

[Tanqexe]

First of all, thanks for taking such a long time to voice your opinion.

 

But I flatly, vehemently disagree. I'm not gonna mince words here.

 

The saber system does NOT need streamlining. It is an integrated whole and is not a hodgepodge of ideas. Your criticism lies more on the insulting, jaded, ignorant side of the spectrum of criticisms, actually, rather than something constructive. In fact, plenty of people have come through over the years proclaiming their dissatisfaction and stating how things should be - and the ideas reeked of watered down inspiration from features of other mods such as MovieBattles (which took a divergent path from OJP way back in the day), or JAplus. We don't do watered down, here, and we're definitely not going to emulate the gameplay style of other mods because, frankly, if someone's so gung-ho about those kinds of gameplay styles, they'd be better off spending their time playing those other mods.

 

People fight just fine, thanks. The saber system is meant to be easy to get into (walk in parry directions, hold down to attack) and do well, but it also allows you advanced techniques to give you a greater edge. We're not asking you to solve Schrodinger's equation while doing a handstand with a pencil in your mouth even at the "most complicated" level, which is pretty much how you're presenting this.

 

The system is only broken if a random new guy swings like a madman and manages to kill a vet who's been at it for more than a year. Instant kills were put in place so you wouldn't get overwhelmed quickly in pile-on situations. And really, instakill happens often either because you can't parry and died from a saberlock that a bot delivered to you or you're running around thinking you can play OJP like it's baseJA or MB2.

 

Seriously, if you think the saber system is random, boy do I have a beachfront property in Kansas to sell you. Your example of holding down attack and walking is pretty weak - if you really knew how to play then such newbie strategies as random combo spam would be easily overcome. Most of us would probably agree that the system is broken the day that newbies can consistently sparm and spam and spam and defeat people who are proficient in the saber system. And "complicated system to trigger locks?" LOL, if you don't parry a power attack, you enter a saberlock. That's actually in the manual. Saberlocks have their place in combat, especially the overhead locks that knock your opponent down. They also serve to break the pace of combat in your favor.

 

Succinctly speaking, what you've been painstakingly describing with anecdotes that probably took an hour to write can be considered "the blind leading the blind."

 

You are correct about the manual, however. The manual is outdated and was not written in the context of the target audience. I'm rewriting the manual throughout the summer. And I have a HUD design that's about a year old waiting in the hangars to be made which streamlines everything to the peripheral vision. I guess one thing you learn from having to write for the general audience is that you have to explain every single thing in simple words along with pretty diagrams - the manual will have just that, so wait a little while until it's done before you pass such harsh judgment.

[Maxstate]

if people took as much time to focus on learning the manual as they did for making these posts they'd be better at the game hth

[JRHockney*]

Gah. Tanq, I guess we're going to have to get use to this kind of thing. The mod is expanding fast and over the years we gotten more than a few impatient ingame players who make the same kind of ignorant presumptions without any training or proper reading of the manual (which does have a few errors but nothing game recking. Heck some of the best players in OJP learned just from the manaul). I'm guessing we have more to come.

 

Anyways ytmh, just about eveybody who I've trained to use this system (about 100 or so) end up agreeing that its is VERY balanced and well made and most ended up saying for a while at least (many left because of lack of players). OJP sabercombat is time tested and hardcore jka saberist approved. Those few they didnt think so either had severe ADHD and couldnt focus long enough to learn anything, or they where dogmatic supporters of JKA jump around and swing wildly without every purposefully blocking sabering and where too insulted that we would divert from their sacred gameplay without using an traditional all around block button (parrying is this mods offical block and walking sort of the lesser manual block). Man thats a big sentence The fact is, OJP does saber/sword combat in a way that has never been done before so it is not something you can just figure out ingame as most players think they can. Its really not that complicated either, there are only 4 new moves, a few cool exploits, and a new general sabering concept. We have enough veterens and new moderate level converts to tell us our system is just fine. You knoweth not what you speak. Learneth it first and speaketh again if thou art wise.

[[Alpha]-0mega-]

Some other guy wus talking about random combat winningz as well.

So I kicked his ass three times, and I asked, "random? RANDOM!?!?!?!" and kicked 20 other people's asses.

lawlz random systemz.

 

20-0, that's like a random number generator that randomly generates 9-9-9-9-9-9-9-9.

[Maxstate]

Man I'm going to have to mellow things out here, the venom spitting is all over the place!

 

You guys are turning into the grumpy old me;p

 

Ytmh. I have a few suggestions for you to increase the fun you experience in your game:

1) Read the manual. My sig has a link to it - it'll really teach you a lot.

2) Read the first page of the forums.

3) Try to beat a bot 9 times out of then, using only a single style.

4) Now use a different style and try the same.

5) Masturbate.

6) Join 85.14.216.23:24001 after 5:30PM GMT+1 time and goto 7)

7) Fight me, for I will kick your crab ass.

[Ytmh]

That's all fine and dandy.

 

Except that nobody addressed my first two points. What's up with that?

 

Anyways, I'm familiar with the working of the mod enough (seeing as, uh, I've been around since it actually started!) and I've read through the manual(s) enough to know what changed and what didn't. I said this before.

 

Also, what about the other suggestions? The HUD thing, the way to do the attack cancels? Different parrying mechanism? And so on? Did anyone actually read what I wrote at all or just posted angry replies?

 

Really, such a reaction was unnecessary since, y'see, I wasn't exactly saying the thing sucked. On the contrary, I said it was pretty good! Various times! I also noted it was fun and it worked to a reasonable level.

 

There was a degree of misunderstanding here, I presume. First of all, I didn't say the system was random. I said it SEEMED random in a few PARTICULAR occasions where there was no visual clue as to what did what (and my example were the saber locks.) Therefore figuring out what was going on was frustrating. Plus, I've seen the mention of "random saber lock" thrown around in the manual (by the superbreak section) or otherwise when describing the system. Maybe it's not like that anymore.

 

So, if reading the manual (or at least the ones I have read) hints towards a RANDOM ELEMENT, I'm sorry. I don't know what else to say since it's on the goddamn manual which everyone urges me to read (which, like I said, I have MANY TIMES.) It could be that the manual is wrong, however. If that's the case, then it'd be wise to take that out. Or if a new version of the manual doesn't have it and I haven't seen it forgive me for not knowing. :>

 

Seriously, if this is how you react to people trying to help...

 

Anyways, I'm not saying the system should be watered down. I'm saying it should be streamlined. Ace commented that he was a little worried about over-designing, and also agree to some point. The whole system works in essence if you get used to it and know what's going on, which is nothing bad really. But, some things could be even better, like the whole saberlock fiasco which, regardless of whatever excuses it's still pretty mediocre. The instakills shouldn't be there at all, again, from design logic. It'd be perfectly fine to put the instakills on a toggle as well or as an option if they MUST be there.

 

The point is, consider what I'm saying rather than throw it overboard just because you think I have no idea of what I'm talking about. And, also, please READ the damn things I said and COMMENT on the suggestions. That's why I made them, otherwise I wouldn't be posting any goddamn thing at all. Much less try to explain my points in detail only to be A: misunderstood because B: Nobody READ WHAT I SAID.

 

So, tone down the "lol we no bettarrr!12" bull**** and think about what I'm saying and actually comment on my suggestions. ALL of them, if possible.

[Maxstate]

1)

You didn't install it correctly --> it's not finding the proper texture.

 

2)

I don't remember changing the firing/gun holding animation except for pre-v1.2 testing with Darth.

 

I think you did something wrong. Check whether you still have older files in your ojpenhanced folder and remove them.

[Ytmh]

Can you be more specific? What is it not finding and where should it find it? I can probably fix it if I knew this.

 

As for the animations, I have no idea. The 2 blaster firing animation I mean, is mine messed up and it shouldn't have the person lifting their hands forwards to fire? It obstructs the view if you're in 1st person, if this doesn't happen in anyone's game, then I guess is my problem somehow. How can this get messed up anyways?

[Maxstate]

That's all fine and dandy.

 

Except that nobody addressed my first two points. What's up with that?

 

Anyways, I'm familiar with the working of the mod enough (seeing as, uh, I've been around since it actually started!) and I've read through the manual(s) enough to know what changed and what didn't. I said this before.

Fine

 

Also, what about the other suggestions? The HUD thing, the way to do the attack cancels? Different parrying mechanism? And so on? Did anyone actually read what I wrote at all or just posted angry replies?

There is nothing mandating that we read what you posted. However, most of us did and concluded it was a bunch of bison diarrhea.

You posted about the system being confusing and compared it nostalgically to an older version where things made more sense.

 

Really, such a reaction was unnecessary since, y'see, I wasn't exactly saying the thing sucked. On the contrary, I said it was pretty good! Various times! I also noted it was fun and it worked to a reasonable level.

Your reasoning infuriates the people that have been working on the mod.

Example:

 

Namely, if you're paying attention to the animations, movements you're supposed to be doing (and timing!) plus the meters on the side and other such things it becomes just very "Well, uh. Doing this works, let's try it again and again." I ignored half the system and managed to beat them bots (and people, though that's relative) left and right no problem.

 

What I see:

hai guys this mod has so so many gauges omg and its sooooo random i haven't really tried ot understand it most of the time so yeah

 

There was a degree of misunderstanding here, I presume. First of all, I didn't say the system was random. I said it SEEMED random in a few PARTICULAR occasions where there was no visual clue as to what did what (and my example were the saber locks.) Therefore figuring out what was going on was frustrating. Plus, I've seen the mention of "random saber lock" thrown around in the manual (by the superbreak section) or otherwise when describing the system. Maybe it's not like that anymore.

Then if it only SEEMS random there's no problem right? I mean if these forums only SEEM to work, we can SEEMINGLY post on them and other people SEEM to see our posts!

 

But seriously, if it seems to be random, then you're saying that you're not sure whether it is or it isn't random. We can't do anything with that. Either we ignore what you said or ask you to explain.

 

Oh and btw:

when actually playing the thing it feels very random

it seems that when you play the game it SEEMS TO BE FEEL VERY SEEMINGLY RANDOM.

 

So, if reading the manual (or at least the ones I have read) hints towards a RANDOM ELEMENT, I'm sorry. I don't know what else to say since it's on the goddamn manual which everyone urges me to read (which, like I said, I have MANY TIMES.) It could be that the manual is wrong, however. If that's the case, then it'd be wise to take that out. Or if a new version of the manual doesn't have it and I haven't seen it forgive me for not knowing. :>[//quote]

what random element?

 

Seriously, if this is how you react to people trying to help...

Your jumbled mess of destructive criticism is supposed to help? Personally I feel it's an insult. The tone of your posts just sounds so arrogant.

 

Anyways, I'm not saying the system should be watered down. I'm saying it should be streamlined. Ace commented that he was a little worried about over-designing, and also agree to some point. The whole system works in essence if you get used to it and know what's going on, which is nothing bad really. But, some things could be even better, like the whole saberlock fiasco which, regardless of whatever excuses it's still pretty mediocre. The instakills shouldn't be there at all, again, from design logic. It'd be perfectly fine to put the instakills on a toggle as well or as an option if they MUST be there.

I agree about saberlocking. I usually turn it off at the TNTClan with G_saberlocking 0.

 

The point is, consider what I'm saying rather than throw it overboard just because you think I have no idea of what I'm talking about. And, also, please READ the damn things I said and COMMENT on the suggestions. That's why I made them, otherwise I wouldn't be posting any goddamn thing at all. Much less try to explain my points in detail only to be A: misunderstood because B: Nobody READ WHAT I SAID.

The reason you are being commented on thusly is because the arrogance is literally drooping off of your post. Many of us started in the masters of the force era of OJP, doesn't mean we're going to make note of it in our posts. You come in and it's the first thing you put on top of your post like it's supposed to give you a free pass to pee on everything we've worked on, and mostly because in your opinion it's random and unstreamlined.

 

How exactly are we supposed to feel? I'm not a sycophant, sorry.

 

So, tone down the "lol we no bettarrr!12" bull**** and think about what I'm saying and actually comment on my suggestions. ALL of them, if possible.

Yeah guys what the drat? I mean all you did was put the mod together you don't know anything GRAHGRARAGHHHHHHHHHhjhhh

 

 

fffffffffff

[Ytmh]

I'm not sure if this particular manual is updated or makes sense with the current version, but:

 

"Superbreaks:

This is essentially the OJP finishing move. It requires the use of a move that causes a saberlock whether it be an Attack Fake, Attack Parry (if we keep it the way it is), or just a random lock."

 

What's "just a random lock" supposed to mean?

 

Like I said, it could be just a way of saying, or it's wrong, or any of that. But it's there.

 

And if what I say angers anyone, well that's too bad. I didn't intend that and certainly I don't want to argue or otherwise fight anyone over such nonsense. I don't really care that I was around when the thing was created and nobody should really care either. It has no real importance beyond, uh, that I was really surprised it was so long ago (I looked at my join date, wow.)

 

If everyone thought the suggestions I made were nonsense, then it'd have been nice if someone actually said it rather than ignoring it. Moreover, nobody articulated WHY they didn't agree with the suggestions. It'd be nice to know rather than "no, lol." Not cool.

 

That there IS a variable to turn off saberlocking, is really neat. I didn't know this (is it in the c_var document?)

 

Nobody has any obligation to read what I post, nor anyone else's posts for that matter. Why bring this up? Really now, I see that trying to voice my opinion here was perhaps mistake since the current developers can't apparently behave themselves and rather GET ANGRY! and feel their project is UNDER ATTACK! just because someone happens to disagree with them.

 

When in reality, I'm trying to get some sort of idea-debate thing going but it's impossible if A: they're ignored, B: nobody says why they're ignored. I tried to articulate what I thought, and my impressions the best I could. Sure, I can go into further detail, but if it's all disregarded I really don't have any desire to do it.

 

As for destructive criticism?

 

I guess that's what they call it these days when you see something and try to provide solutions to what you're seeing, right? I didn't mention one thing without providing a suggestion on how to fix it, or asking if maybe I wasn't seeing things properly.

 

Very arrogant of me, really.

 

Anyways, get angry (or furious!) all you want but it won't make things particularly better.

[Maxstate]

And look what you dragged yourself into. Broseph, chill out. Hop the border and get some illicit substances.

 

Tell you what. I'll take what you said in account and will try to improve on the lack of cues. I already made some smoke and spark effects for when someone is out of DP. Is that the kind of cues you mean?

[Ytmh]

Tell you what. I'll take what you said in account and will try to improve on the lack of cues. I already made some smoke and spark effects for when someone is out of DP. Is that the kind of cues you mean?

 

Yeah. I don't mean there should be hit sparks shooting out of people's sabers in multiple colors, but something visual always helps. Also, I'd want to know if people getting saber marks on them means anything. They should be well dead if that happens (I've gotten'em in the face, no less, and kept on fighting...) Maybe they should be turned off by default on player models unless there's a way to toggle it once you actually kill someone (and dismemberment isn't toggled.)

 

I'd still like to point out that putting the meters and other critical info on the bottom of the screen would be really really helpful. I already said it'd be a lot easier to keep track of things if they're all close together. Though merc/hybrid characters need also ammo/etc, shields or whatever other HUD info, it can still be done in such way that it's centric and easy to keep track of.

 

You can have it, for example, the 3 meters on a simple curved surface at the bottom, in the same order they are there now. Except DP and mishap would "curve down" offscreen so to speak. Below you can have the style selected and ammo count. Very simple. The left side HUD is probably best used for item handling. Say, force power selection, weapon selection. Make small icons of the weapons/force powers and put them in the left HUD corner. If health doesn't go in the middle, it can go here as well (where it currently is.)

 

I also want to go back to the way attack cancels are done. Currently, fake starts are very intuitive and work rather well, so well that it only makes sense to "blend" both the start fakes and the actual cancels. What do I mean? Rather than have a specific button to do the cancel/redirection attack fake stuff, have it be a simple streamlined part of attacking. Like I suggested before, an idea would be that once you start an attack fake, you can cancel it into a real attack by pressing attack again (maybe moving into a different direction and triggering a different attack angle too.)

 

It would feel much more coherent if it was done this way since start fakes and attack fakes are very much the same thing except one actually continues to attack (but from another direction.) It makes sense to make the controls reflect this and it would be more intuitive as well.

 

I don't understand why attack fakes do bonus damage. I assume it's a system-implemented "Oh ****, he canceled now I'm unprepared!" but the thing is that visually the attacks that show up from the cancel, despite the trail effect and so on, don't seem to be that different from regular attacks. And also, it doesn't make much sense that just because you canceled something it does more damage. It should as well be the opposite, canceling provides you with an opportunity to actually hit so the hit damage should be slightly reduced because of the opportunity advantage. At least from design standpoint, that makes more sense (and, if I'm not mistaken, some fighting games do the same as well. Or, they treat cancels and regular moves the same.)

 

As for the sidestep/parrying direction thing, the reason I suggested this was because I think that you'd get basically the same gameplay with a simpler rule set. I find the parrying system overall pretty OK (though I have a couple of suggestions on that too,) but like I said, it'd work pretty well with just left and right for parrying, even overheads and otherwise vertical attacks.

 

Think of it this way, if you're moving sideways and someone slashes vertically, you have the advantage of moving automatically out of the way by virtue of body movement in comparison to the slash direction. This much should be obvious.

 

Why make this particular thing simpler? Because it'd be easier to get into, and easier to understand. Plus, it'd be good to remember that the most competitive games are generally rather simple; the actual skill comes from how the simplicity is put to use and how it's complemented. Doom and Quake, Unreal, ETC are all really "point and shoot", but you get complexity in way of map flow, weapon situational usage, and so on.

 

Fighting games, which is what this is closer to, work with a very simple set of things (you move, you block, you attack) and there are things on top of it such as cancels, specials, parries, ETC ETC.

 

Think of it this way, if we separate the current system into "basic" elements, it's still a lot of things. Moving into the slashes to parry them is, BY ITSELF, rather complicated way to handle blocking (as opposed to pressing one direction to block, or a button.)

 

About the whole parrying system, I'd like to bring the example of the Soul Calibur system's block/parrying/deflect system. It's pretty simple, you have a block button that blocks everything you'd expect it to block. But, you also have the possibility to use the block button to make the block work as a parry (if you press forward while blocking) or deflect (if you press backwards while blocking.) In comparison, here the system is ALWAYS blocking, and you only work with parrying.

 

Manual blocking is something very difficult to do considering lag issues, etc etc, specially when the failure to block results in instant death (or slippery slope towards it.)

 

But the way I see it, the DP meter is actually functioning as the "health" and it's understandable that it would since sabers generally kill on hit. So, really, the parrying system isn't like in soul calibur where it's added on top of a simple blocking system, but it IS the entire blocking system altogether.

 

I actually like the idea of this, but what I'm getting at, is that it's a little complicated for it to be the "base" system. Hence, reducing it to just 2 directions would be more elegant, put focus on trying to work with the extended abilities/moves and be more intuitive/easier to get into to boot.

 

Another thing that I think can be reworked or improved is the concept of attack-parries or start fake parries. It's logical to try to have a system built with consideration of blades hitting eachother and all that jazz. But, like it is now, it's not something that one can have total control of, and it's just bound to happen accidentally.

 

The way it's done now is actually not precisely bad (moving into the slash + attack) but is there any way to do it in a way that won't come out accidentally (in virtue of, I want to attack so I move right and attack, just as the other is attacking and it happens, despite me having no intention to do it.) There should also be a rather hefty penalty for failing to do it, but right now since it's part of actually moving and attacking that triggers it, you can't have a penalty.

 

Why penalty? I'll cite another example of parrying in a similar way, say SFIII third strike. Parrying has the huge advantage of canceling the other's attacks with no damage + the opportunity to cancel the parry into an attack of your own. But if you fail, you get hit in the face. Pretty much the same thing with soul calibur.

 

Here, however, that sort of "simple but effect" way of working is not present. Surely, failing to parry AT ALL results in quick defeat (DP, or health actually, goes down and you die.) and since parrying IS blocking, it shouldn't be penalized for failing other than, well, getting hit. But any extra bonus parrying types SHOULD be penalized, and the player should consider the risk vs the benefits of doing it. It adds to the strategy and it's, really, how it's seen to work best in games.

 

So, in light of that, I suggest that an ADVANCED parry type (such as the attack parry), should be triggered by moving into the slash + something else, that isn't attack. If that button is pressed and the circumstances aren't precisely right, you get hit or actually have to matrix-dodge.

 

That way, considering the usage of the button in that circumstance would be a strategic gamble, like parrying is in other games. But, the benefits should also be rather clear. If you DO manage to "do it right", it should disarm/push back/knock down, or any other such important effect.

 

I hope that clears up what I meant with my suggestions.

[Viper32]

ok i didnt care to actually read all the long ass post but from what i did read this is what i got:

 

 

whine whine whine bitch bitch bitch whine whine, why do i suck, whine whine whine bitch bitch bitch.

 

 

 

 

 

ok now something constructive, i've heard numerous players ask for an ingame saber manual. this could either be from the console via /manual command or from the character selection screen. would definately have to be up to date tho.

[Ytmh]

Thanks for your so-well-informed and researched insight into what was going on before you posted.

[Tanqexe]

ok now something constructive, i've heard numerous players ask for an ingame saber manual. this could either be from the console via /manual command or from the character selection screen. would definately have to be up to date tho.

 

Working on that. Will write .menu files etc. after July 10 when I finish MCAT.

[JRHockney*]

Hey I really dont have much time so I kind of speed read everything that been written. I'll just point out a few things:

 

What's "just a random lock" supposed to mean?

 

Random locks actually happen when yu have the g_saberlockfactor set to 1 or higher. We see it to 0 by default because they where not very fair. I'll have to clearify that in the manual or get rid of it.

 

Originally Posted by ytmnh

Anyways, I'm not saying the system should be watered down. I'm saying it should be streamlined. Ace commented that he was a little worried about over-designing, and also agree to some point. The whole system works in essence if you get used to it and know what's going on, which is nothing bad really. But, some things could be even better, like the whole saberlock fiasco which, regardless of whatever excuses it's still pretty mediocre. The instakills shouldn't be there at all, again, from design logic. It'd be perfectly fine to put the instakills on a toggle as well or as an option if they MUST be there.

 

I agree about saberlocking. I usually turn it off at the TNTClan with G_saberlocking 0.

 

I still dont understand objections over teh saberlocks and I probably never will. It is an extreme rarety that I get complaints or even dislikings about them my server, and probabky only 5-10% of all veteren fights end with saberlocks kills anyways. Its for visual variaty and its very well balanced. If your not quick enough to break them, or your not quick enough to parry them or dodge them when your critical to avoid the superbreak finishing move, its your own fault. And since theres a penalty for attempting a superbreak when your opponent is not low on DP, its balanced.

 

 

I'd still like to point out that putting the meters and other critical info on the bottom of the screen would be really really helpful.

 

Maybe, thats up to whoever is making and coding the next hud. Not too bad of an idea. I'd personally like to make the hud in such a way that it gives you more visual and maybe even verbal feedback on what happening to you (so noobs dont get confused as easily)

 

I don't understand why attack fakes do bonus damage. I assume it's a system-implemented "Oh ****, he canceled now I'm unprepared!" but the thing is that visually the attacks that show up from the cancel, despite the trail effect and so on, don't seem to be that different from regular attacks. And also, it doesn't make much sense that just because you canceled something it does more damage. It should as well be the opposite, canceling provides you with an opportunity to actually hit so the hit damage should be slightly reduced because of the opportunity advantage. At least from design standpoint, that makes more sense (and, if I'm not mistaken, some fighting games do the same as well. Or, they treat cancels and regular moves the same.)

 

ALot of trainers call these power attacks already and that apart of the original intend when they where first made. I understand your point though, but its realy not taht much more damage that is done.

 

As for the sidestep/parrying direction thing, the reason I suggested this was because I think that you'd get basically the same gameplay with a simpler rule set. I find the parrying system overall pretty OK (though I have a couple of suggestions on that too,) but like I said, it'd work pretty well with just left and right for parrying, even overheads and otherwise vertical attacks.

 

That would jsut be too simple and would make fights (especially for us vets) take forever since it would be a nightmare trying to break through parrying. It may seem hard to you being a beginner, but even with the system as it is now, a noob breaking through a veterens parrying is like trying to break through a brick wall with a little hammer When vets fight they have to use alot of tricky angles in order to the opponent out and make them anticipate wrong

 

About the whole parrying system, I'd like to bring the example of the Soul Calibur system's block/parrying/deflect system. It's pretty simple, you have a block button that blocks everything you'd expect it to block. But, you also have the possibility to use the block button to make the block work as a parry (if you press forward while blocking) or deflect (if you press backwards while blocking.) In comparison, here the system is ALWAYS blocking, and you only work with parrying.

 

Its not ALWAYS blocking. if your hit in a running swing or running and from behind, your dead, and it happens ALOT since people love the extra damage running hits do. Some fsome fights even end with one swing. The reason we dont have a block button (like MB2) is for because its too spammable and it slows down the combat since most systems require you to not be attacking when your holding block. If you allow them to hold block button while they swing, no damage gets done unless you have other inbetween things you can do to raise or low damage. But anyways our system allows you to parry (the true block) while you swing and it makes for some estremely fast action that you cant realy find in a system with a block button. Even if you could conjure up something comparable, we have no desire to change what has been the foundation of this system and has worked for well for far too many of us to want to relearn it. Your in the tiny minority of players who what to change that so its probably never going to happen, sorry.

 

Your always welcome to post ideas, but when it comes to ideas changing a time tested sabersystem, you better really know what your taking about and giving it a good enough run to say you'll never like certain parts of it. If you had posted a year and a half ago anout these things, things might have been different since we where still planning. that planning has worked very well thus far. anyways I've written way too much for the amount of time I have. Later

[[Alpha]-0mega-]

Tricky angles..... I got accused by Rev of "yawing" (well duh I have to turn to aim at a moving person right) lol, and then I noticed that if I look at the ground whilst doing down to up slashes, the saber bounces off the floor =(

 

Rev & State called it. "Anti-Yaw" lol.