Reasons why the Lightsaber Needs to be Made Respectable

[Emperorsbauble]

The topic of improving the lightsaber and making it a more formidable and repectable weapon is a great one that does need to be addressed.

 

In the first Jedi Knight game lightsabers were reduced to being a weaker alternative to the good reliable blaster. In single player you could not get through an entire level with just the lightsaber, the ultimate jedi's weapon. In Multiplayer, the lightsaber was restricted to being, at some times, a last resort, and was often the weaker alternative to most of the higher powered guns.

 

Lightsaber battles were not the elegant and awe-inspiring duels that were depicted so beautifully in the movies. The effectiveness, versatality, and elegance of the weapon established in the movies just did not cross over into JK. For these reasons it is of most importance that the lightsaber needs to be made more respectable, and made the elegant and superior jedi's weapon.

 

The points mentioned in this form are all very true and the suggestions of fixing this issue are good. A faster attack rate, would increase the damage potential of the weapon, but the single swing did have a pretty fast attack rate, and the double swing had a justifiable attack rate considering its damage. Location based damage is a great suggestion which would allow a greater realism and reward for accuracy, a sloppy hit, to the leg or arm, would resolve in less damage, and a accurate one, to the torso or head, would allow for greater damage, or even a one hit kill. However the lightsaber does need higher damage for the single swing. In comparison to the double swing, the single swing was rendered useless even thought it allowed for a quicker attack rate.

 

Force speed and force jump do not need to be toned down, but restricted. A person playing with guns should not even have the ability to utilize the force powers, in the movies, how many stormtroppers could use force jump or force speed, none. But a jedi should have great speed and jump potential. Perhaps a soldier character could have similar "powers", which would allow for faster speed and higher jumps, and maybe higher accuracy, but in comparison to a jedi, there powers would be a fraction of the jedi's. To balance the Jedi and the soldier types, a jedi could be restricted to force and saber only, allowing a soldeir to use all guns, but no saber, and little " force powers". That way, there would be no soldier that could run circles around a player while bombarding them with concussion rifle blasts.

 

But the jedi's powers, in general, could be toned down, in certain circumstances. A jedi should be able to block every single blaster bolt, as seen in the movies, but at reasonable expenditure of force. This would give a jedi the ability to block all blasts, but also giving a good soldier the ability to hit a jedi, by wearing them down, similar to the scene with obi-wan and qui-gon jinn and the droidekas, where the jedi were forced to run.

 

Another key problem, is lightsaber fighting in general. Because of the lightsabers hinderance, some addressed and suggested here, duels were reduced to what can be desrcibed as two trains colliding. Players would run at each other, and double swing (single swing was useless) trying to hit the opponent but also avoiding a hit by opponent. This ping pong type duel, where players continued to run at each other and swing, was in my opinion less than elegant. As depicted in the star wars movies, the lightsaber duels were upclose, dangerous, very elegant, and relied on finesse to beat the opponent. Few battles in JK could compare to any of those seen in the movies. In my opinion, this is a huge factor in making the lightsaber more respectable. The lightsaber needs to be the upclose and dangerous weapon. By making more combignations/moves available would help, but by improving the lightsabers blocking, so that two players could duel relatively close, would make it all the more elegant, and respectable. Or, perhaps, by making the player block him/her self, the player would be able to, by acquiring the skill, be able to block blaster bolts, and lightsabers or by making both recetible to force expenditure, players would have to wear down the opponent, in order to make a hit. In my opinion the most memorable battles are not the quick kills and the fast paced massacres, but the little longer, harder, and grueling matches between two people, where utilizing finesse, instead of brute strength and force, win.

[ed_silvergun]

Okay, it seems I should clarify. I was not suggesting that Raven should create some kind of über-Jedi. I was suggesting that, theoretically almost anything should be blockable, but of course, this would not work in a gaming environment. Jedi do need to be vulnerable, and do need to have wekanesses. This is essential if the game is to be fun.

 

Personally, I do think that Jedi should be able to block more powerful weapons, but that this should be implemented together with some sort of mana reserve for blocking. I think that blocking should take up some force power (even if it is not redirected at the sender). Blocking should be automatic, but even deflecting blaster bolts should take up a bit of mana. Maybe a Jedi could deflect about 500 shots from a trooper rifle before his mana ran out, but only about 10 shots from an AT-AT, because the blast is more powerful.

 

The reasoning behind this (and this is an approach I've only recently come to favour) is that it would make Jedi have to think more tactically when approaching a situation.

 

On the subject of absorbing blast damage, no, I don't think that Jedi should just be able to absorb rocket blasts. What I said was, "If a Jedi or Sith possessed the power to simply block or absorb blaster fire, surely they could do the same with the energy released as a result of a rocket impact or a concussion blast?". This was intended as a rhetorical question. Firstly, I realise that in terms of game balance giving Jedi this kind of power would be unfeasible, and secondly this is a power we only ever see Vader use. As he is one of - if not the - most powerful force user ever, it is logical to assume that this is a power only accessible to the most powerful of Jedi/Sith. It may even be a power used only by the Dark Side. We don't know.

 

Either way, I personally would not want to see this feature in Outcast. I only brought it up because it seemed like an interesting talking point.

 

Hope that clears things up a bit.

[DeathBoLT]

ed:

To be honest, I would have thought that this is exactly the sort of thing that the "hardcore" would want. If it's so easy to fight saberists, then surely you guys would relish the challenge of having more powerful sabers. It'll be something new to do. It must have got dreadfully boring by now just grabbing the biggest gun on the map and aiming it at your opponents' feet...

Well, actually, of most hardcore players in JK consist of the following types: Those whose systems are too lousy to play any other game and those who are too stuck in a rut to move to any other games. The people who belong to the latter type of JK players, Jedi Knight is the game that they're respected for and recognized in and they're too intimidated by the newer communities and the fact that they have a long while to go before they'll actually matter in the gaming scene. Its that sudden lack of fame that keeps them stuck to JK.

 

vagabond:

Further, from a gameplay perspective, once one starts down this path, the journey has begun toward making the Jedi nearly invicible. If a Jedi can defend against any and every type of weapon and/or damage, then they could never be hurt.

The Jedi needs to be able to defend against every type of weapon. The potential to intercept every incoming shot should be there. If you're good enough, you ought to be able to block everything they send your way(heavy weapons or not), as long as you intercept it while its still in the air. What they should not be able to defend against is the damage. Once you fail to block it or escape it, you should recieve the appropriate damage for it. None of this splash damage defending Force Absorb crap..

 

 

krayt tion

Jedi currently do not have a long range power like destruction to help them combat against the hitting distance of guns. We'll see if Raven thinks it is necessary to include this for guns vs. saber balance.

 

All of the things mentioned in this post deal with the approach from long distances that a saberist must make to get to the gunner to land a saber blow. This is one part of balance that I can see, the other is saber effectiveness in closed ranged combat which I'm not discussing in this post.

 

There won't be destruction, but as far as long range attacks, a Jedi does have one: Saberthrow. It'll be effective when sneaking up on someone, in single player, etc. but I'd never give up my saber to throw it for a second against a experienced gunner who knows I'm there. My defense and my offense would lie in the saber. My long range weapon would be the bolts that I send right back at them after they fired at me. My ammunition supply will be them. I won't even need to get near them if they keep popping off shots that I can successfully block. Against someone who is good at blocking, it will take a extremely innovative gunner to land shots that count.

 

However they approach it, the list of suggestions we made focuses on correcting this basic problem:

A gunner can easily dispatch a saberist of the same skill level in their own respective areas. Its wrong, and I'm glad to hear that the designers of Jedi Outcast have recognized this problem(see e3 footage of Jk2 with that one interviwer who couldn't remember the name of the game. )

I look foward to seeing how Raven handles making the saber a weapon feared as much as one would fear splash damage dealing weapons.

 

[ August 07, 2001: Message edited by: [eVe]DeathBoLT ]

[WD_ToRMeNt]

Ummm actually no. A few are like that, but I think it's more common amoung the Nfers and casual players. I myself have a high end mechine and I play Q3 (usualy get top 3 in MP games) more now because JK is more or less dead.

[Guest Krayt Tion]

Originally posted by [eVe]DeathBoLT:

<STRONG>There won't be destruction, but as far as long range attacks, a Jedi does have one: Saberthrow. It'll be effective when sneaking up on someone, in single player, etc. but I'd never give up my saber to throw it for a second against a experienced gunner who knows I'm there.</STRONG>

 

I did mention saber throw in my last post when responding to a quote from ed, just so you are aware. I agreed in that post that saber throw was going to be a helpful tool when dealing with gunners. Also mentioned was that I felt, and still feel, that the saber throw will probably only be helpful in midrange (not long range) situations, as that is all the distance I'm guessing it will have. People are bound to approach things differently and I for one would use the saber throw differently. I would trust letting the saber go as I approach (giving up any blocking ability I might have) because the second or two they must use to move out of the way of the saber I will be advancing rapidly with force speed and jumping through the air. It would be sweet if right before I landed, just about on top of the gunner, that the saber would return to my hand and I could slice right into them. This is entirely hypothetical so I can't say what will work for sure (but neither can anyone else).

 

I do not disagree with you that saber blocking should be important by saying this. On the contrary, as you will see below, I think I've come to realize that the Saberists best protection from gunners, especially at long/mid ranges, is blocking done right.

 

Deathbolt I found that one your responses seemed better suited to something ed said rather then what vagabond mentioned. The two seem matched for each other let me pair them out and tell you what I think:

 

Originally posted by ed_silvergun:

<STRONG>I was suggesting that, theoretically almost anything should be blockable, but of course, this would not work in a gaming environment. Jedi do need to be vulnerable, and do need to have wekanesses.</STRONG>

Originally posted by [eVe]DeathBoLT:

<STRONG>The potential to intercept every incoming shot should be there. If you're good enough, you ought to be able to block everything they send your way(heavy weapons or not), as long as you intercept it while its still in the air. What they should not be able to defend against is the damage. Once you fail to block it or escape it, you should recieve the appropriate damage for it. None of this splash damage defending Force Absorb crap..</STRONG>

 

I think ed was headed on the right track and Deadbolt was able to find what seems to be in my mind a very resonable solution to that train of thought.

 

I'm seeing perhaps a collective opinion being formed in regards to saber blocking, so with minor tweaks of my own, let me try it out:

 

Jedi should automatically block everything that threatens to hit their body, but only if they can bring the saber about to face the saber in front of them in a general area/angle in relation to the incoming blast. An obvious example, if you are running away and someone shoots at your back and you do not turn around, you should not be able to block this. This system is of course similar to the original jediknight but from what I'm hearing we would like the following refinements: the ability to direct the shot back at the opponent with a charge in force energy. How large of a deduction in your force pool has yet to be agreed on. The final important distinction to make here is that blocked weapon fire does not equal blocked damage. Blocked blaster fire equals blocked damage. Blocked splash fire equals damage taken from the splash. By this accord the only big issue remaining in saber blocking (and the part that I think people disagree the most on) is should splash fire be allowed to be redirected even after you have taken damage from it? I say no. This then becomes a weapon issue by which the designers must not allow splash weapons to become too damaging in multiplayer.

 

Well?

 

I would respond to other concepts mentioned but these posts don't seem to be getting any shorter these days, and I think further focus in these particular areas would be most helpful.

 

[ August 07, 2001: Message edited by: Krayt Tion ]

[DeathBoLT]

Deathbolt I found that one your responses seemed better suited to something ed said rather then what vagabond mentioned. The two seem matched for each other let me pair them out and tell you what I think:

yeah, i was actually going to include excerpts from both vagabonds and ed's posts, but i didn't to save space

 

The final important distinction to make here is that blocked weapon fire does not equal blocked damage.

Good thinking. Heavy weapons fire sent back at you should be evadable, well because gunners are screwed otherwise.

 

Also, with blocked blaster fire.. for it to be a blocked damage, would the blaster bolt speed be faster than it takes a blasterbolt to hit a target in JK or same speed? Would blocking and sending it back force power be a thing where mana is spent as long as your holding the key down, or would mana only be spent if you deflect something? If it is the former, how would it be difficult to use if the person's reflexes aren't top knotch?

[DeathBoLT]

And if weapons like the conc or rail make their way into JK2, would force push be a better means of blocking? Rail charges seem like they should explode on impact if they come into pure energy.. and Concusion Rifle shots aren't actually energy but Compressed air so they really can't be deflected

 

Would it feasible to send dropped thermals at a person at a high velocity via force push? Sort of a Force Propelled Grenade?

[UberChild]

I agree with one of the above posts, gunners should have no or at least less force power than the jedis, i loved using the saber in the game, speed up to someone 2 slashes/ a small grip attack and a slash or whatever and they were dead, the problem was peple with conc rifles, running aaround with force powers, they would grip then shoot ya and you were helpless, or they would force run away then shoot ya, maybe they should implement movement of the saber like thay planned to for obi wan, b4 it became x-box crap, use the mouse as you would if you were holding the blade, maybe hold a mosue button and move mouse to the left, and blade moves to the left, if you dont press mouse button, the blade stays at default block like in the original game, but does not block everysingle shot (it blocked most of them), then you have the choice, block yourself, or not.. the skilled would get good at this and would be able to test themselves at blockin, it would also possibly work for fighting, you see the blade coming from your left, move to the left to block.. this would bring some skill into blocking and also fighting, only problem is it would make the game dammm hard, and i dont think they will want to scare away potential new players, who never even played jk, well its just an idea, but i definitly agree with the idea of less or no force power for gunners..

[Syndrix]

Posted by [eVe]DeathBoLT

 

Would blocking and sending it back force power be a thing where mana is spent as long as your holding the key down, or would mana only be spent if you deflect something? If it is the former, how would it be difficult to use if the person's reflexes aren't top knotch?

 

I think it would have to be the latter of your suggestions DeathBoLT, if it were s long as you were holding down the key it would eat through mana too quick. It could be said that many would get the hang of pressing the key in time, but what about the others that dont play enough to get their reflexes (as you rightfully pointed out) to the point where they can use it. If it was your first suggestion it could (maybe) have the ability to unbalance the game.

 

Would it feasible to send dropped thermals at a person at a high velocity via force push? Sort of a Force Propelled Grenade?

 

In one of the recent previews it rather quizzically mentioned that you could deflect thermal detornators. It didn't say by the lightsaber, so it could be argued, as a few already have, what the previewer was talking about was Force pushing detonators away, I hope so as it would be an interesting addition.

 

What are you talking about below Wilhuf? Hehehe (OK so above is what I meant)

 

[ August 08, 2001: Message edited by: Syndrix ]

[Wilhuf]

Using a separate power for blocking specific munitions would add unncessary complexity. It would be easier (and probably more fun) to use one power (Force Block) to block all ammo types.

 

Although push could work as well. Simply push the heavy weapons round out of the way, spoiling the attack. Would be fun to see the reaction of 'l33t_gamerX' gunner when his concussion round curves off target, exploding harmlessly against the wall or floor. And of course there would be nothing to stop 'l33t_gamerX' gunner from doing the same thing to defend himself against enemy incoming fire. It would certainly add some fun and interesting strategy to the game.

 

BTW I read on one of the recent Outcast previews that Force Saber throw would allow the saberist to actually steer the thrown lightsaber in mid-flight. That should help quite a bit in beefing up saber capability. Hit those moving targets with deadly precision.

 

Another option we don't seem to have mentioned is that Force Pull appears to be able to pull enemy targets close in for the kill. So, Saberists could use this ability in multiplayer (theoretically) to drag the enemy gunner close in, and slash them down.

 

Of course the Gunner will also have access to Force Pull, so this won't give any particular unfair advantage to the Saberist. Gunners could apply a similar attack.

 

If Force Pull actually disarms the opponent by yanking the weapon from their hand, I really hope there will be some kind of force absorb or defense. Otherwise, peoples weapons will be constantly pulled.

 

If there is such a thing in Jedi Outcast as 'Force Block' that allows the lightsaber to block all types of incoming fire (except for splash damage), then what is the benefit of force block to the gun? It's a balance consideration.

 

Does Raven really want to produce a Force power that is only of benefit to the lightsaber? It won't be much of a worry since everyone will have access to the lightsaber. But a basic 'fairness' question then is 'will the gun also get any special Force power?'

 

Also, BTW I dont see why a lightsaber couldn't be used to slash the containment field of a concussion round, thereby neutralizing it. Same goes for a rail charge. A saber could cut through the primer and processor, rendering the charge a dud without detonating it. In any case it's all (fun) details.

 

Time for an updated Bulleted List™

 

Suggested Improvements:

• Faster Lightsaber Attack Rate
  
• Location Based Lightsaber Damage (and damage which could affect target movement)
  
• Increased Lightsaber Damage
  
• Ability to block heavy weapons fire with Lightsaber(at cost of Force Block and/or Force Push)
  
• Effective ranged lightsaber attack (faster, steerable Force lightsaber throw)
  
• More lightsaber attack moves/combinations
  
• Better lightsaber animations
  
• Toned Down Speed and Jump (in decreased magnitude and duration and/or increased Force cost)
  
• Force Pull to drag opponent within lightsaber killing range
  
• Customizable gameplay settings (e.g., gravity, overall speed)
  

 

[ August 08, 2001: Message edited by: Wilhuf ]

[DeathBoLT]

SkUnkY_OuNcE, if u want sabers only in a full force game, simply pull every gun in sight. eventually everyone will start using saber b/c they cant hold onto a gun for more than a few seconds.

 

Now if they have absorb, you can't pull there gun but at least you won't have to worry about being gripped; if they have grip and absorb, they're hacking

[Guest Home_Sliced]

I think the saber should be able to block some heavy weapons fire, but not others.

 

For instance, repeating or high power blasters should be blocked as a normal blaster. Merely deflecting the bolt should use up minimal force power (about 1/100) (as opposed to none with a standard blaster). Deflecting back to enemies uses up the same as deflecting a reular blaster bolt at enemies (about 5/100). In this way, a continuous assault would eventually fatigue the Jedi, but they still have blocking power.

 

For a weapon like the rail detonator with explosive charges, the lightsaber should block the rail, but it will still explode. When you put energy (a lightsaber blade) near an explosive, it will go boom. [HOME_SLICED and JEDIKNIGHT2.NET IN NO WAY SUPPORT THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT] Go experiment with a lighter and firecrackers to see what I mean. [/NO SUPPPORT] By blocking the rail, the Jedi only takes splash damage (maybe about 1/2 damage of a direct hit). In this way, there is a benefit to having the saber, but once again a sustained attack will score a frag for the shooter.

 

For a weapon such as the concussion rifle, the lightsaber should not be able to block at all. The CR fires compressed+ionized air. You can't block air with a stick. [HOME_SLICED and JEDIKNIGHT2.NET IN NO WAY SUPPORT THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT] Go to your local airport and stand behind a jet as it takes off to experiment. [/NO SUPPORT] Maybe if you had a large sheet of plywood you could block the CR, but it would throw you back with some extreme forces.

 

[ August 08, 2001: Message edited by: Home_Sliced ]

[Guest Krayt Tion]

Originally posted by [eVe]DeathBoLT:

<STRONG>Would blocking and sending it back force power be a thing where mana is spent as long as your holding the key down, or would mana only be spent if you deflect something?</STRONG>

Originally posted by Syndrix:

<STRONG>I think it would have to be the latter of your suggestions DeathBoLT, if it were s long as you were holding down the key it would eat through mana too quick. It could be said that many would get the hang of pressing the key in time, but what about the others that dont play enough to get their reflexes (as you rightfully pointed out) to the point where they can use it. If it was your first suggestion it could (maybe) have the ability to unbalance the game.</STRONG>

 

The only thing I'm sure of is that block (force block if you will) should not be a key to constantly hold down. No gamer should have to hold down a key for long periods while trying to move around quickly at the same time- it is awkward and it takes up valuable finger resources.

 

This is why most single player FPSes provide an auto-run mode that can be toggled on or off in settings or with a stroke of a key; no one wants to hold down shift for most of the game (for games where slow, cautious movement was required they enabled a Walk key to be held down so you could still use auto-run, this is a much more efficient). I imagine no Jedi will want to hold force block down for much of their battle with a gunner. Imagine if you had to hold down Force Speed so long as you wanted to run super fast!

 

That's how it shouldn't work.

 

There are two ways to block we are talking about here, right? Just blocking - or - blocking and returning the shot to the shooter. At the risk of being repetitive, is this really what most of us agree on at this time? Blocking costs nothing and is automatic. Blocking and returning the shot to where the gunner is/was standing costs mana? Yes?

 

Two ways I can see Force Block being used with these circumstances in mind, here goes:

 

1) Like any other hotkey a Force Block button can be pressed, taking a pre-defined chunk of force and expiring after a certain time like many other powers in JK. While this power is not being used a Jedi can block automatically, but when Force Block is actually turned 'on' a Jedi can send it back where it came from, roughly.

 

2) We have one less hotkey to worry about. Jedi block automatically and automatically return the fire to sender. The autoblocking costs nothing but the return and the fire to the shooter automatically deducts a small amount of force from you mana pool. If you are OOM (out of mana) then you cannot return shots, just block them.

 

edit: Option 2 is very similar to what Home Slice has in mind, he posted while I was typing this message.

 

Okay... next issue:

 

Originally posted by Wilhuf:

<STRONG>Also, BTW I dont see why a lightsaber couldn't be used to slash the containment field of a concussion round, thereby neutralizing it. Same goes for a rail charge. A saber could cut through the primer and processor, rendering the charge a dud without detonating it. In any case it's all (fun) details.</STRONG>

 

I'm in agreement with deathbolt on this, as you could probably tell from what I said in my earlier post. You can block (aka intercept before it hits your body) rails, but I really can't see them doing anything except blow up when they hit your saber. What you describe sounds like it would need to be done in lab with precision tools, not a massive lethal source of energy in less then a second. You can block conc blasts from reaching your body as well, but the lightsaber (the impact zone, cause and center of the splash damage) is very close to your body and you will still get hit by the splash!

 

edit: Also in agreement with Home Sliced, he posted while I was typing, yada yada yada.

 

Finally:

 

Originally posted by Wilhuf:

<STRONG>Does Raven really want to produce a Force power that is only of benefit to the lightsaber? It won't be much of a worry since everyone will have access to the lightsaber. But a basic 'fairness' question then is 'will the gun also get any special Force power?'</STRONG>

 

In a word, yes.

This is why I've been pushing for a more Star Wars-like option in JK2 that lets Jedi (Sabers + Force) play only against Gunners (Guns and No Force) just like we've seen in the movies. Sure, let FF Gunners play against FF Saberists as well. Just give us the option to do either/or. This is also why I mentioned that if Raven did put in a much needed FF Sabers vs NF Guns only mode, that they must make sure the force powers work for well with both against both NF and FF gunners that a Jedi could play against. If we can do it, so can they. Also, balance as far as I've seen is not usually about being equal, or making the same the same kind of thing happen a different way on both sides. Two extremes can exist on opposite ends to give balance. The Yin Yang is a beautiful ancient concept. So sure, Raven can make something gunner only, it can work out. Shouldn't have to be too complex either.

 

[ August 08, 2001: Message edited by: Krayt Tion ]

[Wilhuf]

Now yer gettin' metaphysical on me, K-Ti.

 

Are you saying that the gun should or should not get some kind of additional force enhancement? Or that it isn't really necessary since the gun's Yang is already more than sufficient to counter the Saber's force enhanced Ying?

 

It's true that blocking would probably be more fun if it took place automatically. Fewer controls = more fun. The Force simply draws down as blocking takes place.

 

Of course the savvy gunner could take advantage of this. He attacks a Jedi with a Repeater softening up his force, which is automatically spent on blocking. Now the blocking Jedi has no force juice left for healing or other actions.

 

If there is going to be some kind of Force cost involved in Force Blocking, it may be preferable to at least allow the gamer to decide when to expend that Force. This of course is done by making force blocking a key toggle. Imagine the same scenario, but without automatic drawdown of Force: instead of automatically running out of force while blocking, the Jedi chooses not to enable force blocking, takes a few hits from the repeater, and uses his force for healing. This gives the gamer the feeling that he/she has a little bit more control over the game.

 

So, which is better? Automatic drawdown of force for blocking with return to sender? Or should the gamer have more control over blocking, and learn the skill of using force blocking (and of course an additional key command)?

 

Or how about a compromise? Blocking could be like 'always run' in Jedi Knight. Just hit a 'always force block' checkbox and you will always autoblock at some level of force cost. If you uncheck the 'always force block' option, you will have to hit a key to activate it, and hit it again to switch it off.

 

Also, if blocking is going to cost force power, it really should be able to block heavy weapons. In the original Jedi Knight, autoblocking didn't cost any force power, but couldn't block heavy weapons.

 

If we are to actually add in a force cost to saber blocking in Jedi Outcast, it only seems fitting that the saber blocking should at least be made more effective than in the original JK.

 

BTW extreme levels of energy applied in short periods of time tends to destroy complex and delicate circuitry, such as detonators and fuses. Just because the explosives in a device are exposed to a lightsaber doesn't mean they will necessarily detonate. Likewise, if the ionized casing of a concussion round is ruptured it could completely neutralize the proper process for releasing the explosion

 

[ August 08, 2001: Message edited by: Wilhuf ]

[Guest Krayt Tion]

What is it with people posting while I'm typing and editing today? Just finished editing my message. Let me get back to you, seeing as they might actually be catching on to the fact that I've spent the last 30 minutes typing which isn't even a major function of my job.

[Wilhuf]

Oh and to add to the stream of postings, one question we should talk about is, if there will be such a thing as Force Block that allows us to deflect incoming gunfire, how will it work against enemy lightsabers?

 

[ August 08, 2001: Message edited by: Wilhuf ]

[Guest Krayt Tion]

Now yer gettin' metaphysical on me, K-Ti.

 

Well yes I was, but extremes on both ends do have practical implications outside of philosohpy...

 

Are you saying that the gun should or should not get some kind of additional force enhancement? Or that it isn't really necessary since the gun's Yang is already more than sufficient to counter the Saber's force enhanced Ying?

 

Perhaps the wielder of the gun could have an enhancement instead of the gun inself. That might be better because any damage enhancement (you didn't specify what type of enhancement but damage is a possible major way to enhance the gun) could be brought back to hurt him even more. For the wielder, additional armor for example that could protect them from their own blocked fire could be added. Things you see bounty-hunter types and not Jedi wear. I'm sure we could think of others.

 

However, since our concern is obviously to make the Saber more respected, we could just not add anything to the gun wielder since, as of JK, the gun's Yang is sufficient as it is. In this instance it seems to me too close to call- I would take it to a play test if I were developing the game. Oh well. Any other ideas?

 

So, which is better? Automatic drawdown of force for blocking with return to sender? Or should the gamer have more control over blocking, and learn the skill of using force blocking (and of course an additional key command)

 

At this time I would go with the first one, which is automatic, but drains your force. I would appreciate them streamlining this part of the game and letting me worry about something more fun imo, like cool saber moves and combinations. Mmmm. Play testing.

 

Or how about a compromise? Blocking could be like 'always run' in Jedi Knight. Just hit a 'always force block' checkbox and you will always autoblock at some level of force cost. If you uncheck the 'always force block' option, you will have to hit a key to activate it, and hit it again to switch it off.

 

At this point I'm thinking we have nearly ground this system down to fine grains of salt. Everyone is putting forth their own individual tiny grains. Looks like we are have gotten through the basic stuff though. If I had to answer I would say that I would hope that there is a menu which contains other force options besides block, or this would be one more thing to worry about. I would personally prefer to have all control over the force apparent in-game, provided things were streamlined enough.

 

Also, if blocking is going to cost force power, it really should be able to block heavy weapons. In the original Jedi Knight, autoblocking didn't cost any force power, but couldn't block heavy weapons.

 

Sure, have them block heavy weapons, but remember blocking splash weapons doesn't equal blocking all the damage from them. You would still get hurt. Apparently you still disagree with this concept based on the premise of the argument, or are you merely ignoring it for an attempt at balance? Blocking in the original JK was free, but also usesless at redirecting close to moving targets. With good block return capabilities Force Block would still pay well for itself even it can't stop the damage from splash weapons.

 

BTW extreme levels of energy applied in short periods of time tends to destroy complex and delicate circuitry, such as detonators and fuses. Just because the explosives in a device are exposed to a lightsaber doesn't mean they will necessarily detonate. Likewise, if the ionized casing of a concussion round is ruptured it could completely neutralize the proper process for releasing the explosion

 

Nevermind, apparently you still disagree with that concept. I don't know where you are getting this stuff from... Your argument seems based on, in the case of the rail detonator, assuming you know its wiring and circutry. Since this is all based on assumptions, allow me to assume that if there is a live, dangerous explosive substance in that rail, that substance does not care what any such circutry says if it is physically disturbed. The lightsaber will penetrate that rail easily when it is blocked and set off the good stuff that goes boom boom. As for the conc... I don't know real-world studies you've seen that justify what you are saying... links?

 

[ August 08, 2001: Message edited by: Krayt Tion ]

[Wilhuf]

There are no real world concussion rifles, K-Ti. There are no lizard-men bounty hunters who walk around firing off compressed air through Über-hairdryer rifles. It's purely metaphysical.

 

Yes, I am reasoning that the boom boom stuff remains inert unless detonated. The saber could destroy the detonator mechanism. Boom boom stuff simply falls useless to the ground. That is one justification for blocking heavy weapons.

 

After all plastique can be transported through all kinds of hazardous environments without actually detonating.

 

Another justification is that if it will cost you Force to block, it should actually block all incoming fire. Splash is not blocked. And of course there is the simple necessity of improving balance.

 

I agree, at this point, we're down to details which could only be tested in game. Lets hope Raven will test some of these options to make the saber feared and respected.

[CaptainRAVE]

Reasons why Jedi Outcast Needs to be Made Respectable....

 

Because i want to play it

 

Because u all want to play it

 

I just wish games didnt come out 2 weeks later after they are released in the US.

[DeathBoLT]

The saber may set off rails but whose to say you couldn't put a wall in front of you that would cause the rail to detonate at a safe distance? Force Push, at high enough levels could concievably cause the rail charge to detonate much like it would if it collided with the wall. If I recall correctly, Qui Gon was able to use force push to hurl the Droids into the wall with sufficent power to break them. Why wouldn't such a wall of force be able to set off the triggering mechanisms of a rail charge designed to detonate on impact?

[Tap[RR]]

I just finished watching the jk2 vid on this site (for the 100th time) and i noticed, that when you pull out a gun the force counter dissappears and is replaced by the guns ammo counter! Personally i hope it means what i think it means, maybe raven limited force using only when the saber is in hand, i hope so, cause it would actually take skill to use guns, instead of running around like a freakin moron shooting at walls next to your opponent. **waits for torment to say "that is skill"** And limiting force to Saber equiped players would balance gameplay a bit and encourage strategy and some new tactics. Also for those of you worried about how a saber would cancel out a thrown saber, in the vid at the begining of the duel he throws his saber at the dark jedi and he/she blocks it as if it were a blaster bolt, heh so its all in good.

 

[ August 09, 2001: Message edited by: Tap[RR] ]

[Guest Krayt Tion]

Okay, I thought you were trying to apply some kind of real world science to explain the conc, and was curious where I could find out about such things. But nevermind.

 

Regardless of balance, I still think your rail theory is whack, because even if there are mechanisms to tell it to detonate, the main criteria for that would be impact. Primary mode it 'tells' it "Okay you've hit something now blow up?" Secondary mode yes "Okay you've hit something now latch on and detonate in a few seconds?" Can you at least admit that the rail will ram into the saber? It's not like it can dramatically de-accelerate in less then a second, that's just not possible by our rules or Star Wars rules. Maybe in the Matrix. Rail ---> Saber (Impact). Impact = Boom, either by disturbing its volatile content inside or by something telling it to blow on impact. And if you really want to cut this down into the smallest fractions of a second, then detonators/mechanisms can't know to disable until they've made contact with the saber. If contact with the saber is what initiates the disabling of the denators, impact can only proceed any shutdown of said detonators. And the second it impacts = boom.

 

I suppose the only question is, which is happens faster after impact, the 'shutdown' effect you say the saber will cause, or the mechanisms telling the rail it needs to blow up now? Now that could go either way.

 

The trenches have been dug, what can we do... next.

[Syndrix]

Actually Krayt Tion, the impact-detonate proccess that the rail charge goes through could theoretically never occur. A saber, being composed entirely of energy, may not set it off. For "impact" to occur there needs to be physical resistance, but the saber may slice straight through the rail charge without any resistance. If a saber can slice through pipes and other things, and burn through solid metal doors, who can say that the detonator would even register hitting the saber. Sorry, I dont want to get between you and Wilhuf argueing like a married couple. j/king

 

Back to the block. I assume it is a force power to direct it back at them, not a skill that just takes some force mana. I think it should be a passive force power, and you can toggle it. That way you just need a hotkey to switch it on or off and if it is on, then it automatically deducts a small amount of force. If it is off then you just block the shot at no cost (assuming this is how Raven are doing it). This way you dont have to worry about extra keys, timing it to perfection, or that "savvy gunner" wearing your mana down,hey Wilhuf.

[Guest Krayt Tion]

Anyone that doesn't want to hear more about the rail colliding with the saber can skip this. But since this thread has seemingly run out of steam I see no harm in discussing this further. It's either bickering about nothing this morning or actually using this computer like they want me to (would you hire me?).

 

To use the word "actually" would imply that you have discovered a theoretical 'truth' contrary to the one laid previously before you... and I simply think that is not the case.

 

I must now attack the trench dug on a third front. There is going to be resistance between the rail and saber. Contrary to what you've stated I see no way the rail could be split by the saber without some kind of friction and disturbance. The rail won't split by the saber, gliding past it like grease lightning sent from the heavens. My physics is a little rusty but what one thing rubbing by another is frictionless? Friction does not only manifest itself in human-made objects we might commonly associate it with, like our jeans going down a slide. Anything with electrons in it, last time I checked, is good to go... and electrons part are of course part of the "building blocks of life."

 

The examples you gave, I don't see what they had to do with your point, if anything they hurt it. Qui-Gon pushing his saber hard through the blast doors? Oh, there certainly wasn't any friction there.

 

Furthermore, all I did last post was explore Wilhuf's theory to showcase doubt in it and was temporarily choosing it over mine to do so. Every bit of what you said can be thrown out if you begin to explore my suggestion that the contents of the rail are volatile and will make a mess if disturbed. This includes collision and penetration.

 

Anything else to throw in here? Hmm, yes. The best and easiest place to block on the saber might actually we wider then the rail itself. Meaning: it cannot pass through the saber, cannot collect 200 dollars, because it will slam into that wall of energy just like it would anything wider then itself.

 

PS- married couples rarely arguely logically.

[Syndrix]

Well fair enough, I could argue with you more but I wont, because I was just joking above and dont really want to precipitate any more of this rail gun debate.

 

P.S You call that LOGIC! calm down Krayt Tion, I'm just joking.