cRPG
cRPG => General Discussion => Topic started by: v/onMega on June 15, 2012, 09:47:54 am
-
Hi folks.
cRPG being under heavy revision, mechanics get changed, there s a lot happening.
Thanks to the devs at this place.
Now, one thing that I want to sort out:
No topic for useless lobbying or realism discussion, please
You choose your armor according to your preferences and needs on the battlefield.
Heavy armor is supposed to protect you better. Heavy is defined weight 20 + for me.
Mostly you ll add heavy gloves and helmets.
All in all a heavy loadout, accounting for 30 or more weight (allrdy considering multipliers for head and hands)
High weight, high upkeep, higher protection.
We can agree that there is some benefits and reasons to choose heavy armor
WHY I WRITE THIS:
With all the supposed benefits, one thing doesnt make any sense:
The randomness in the effective values your armor will protect you.
In 69 bodyarmor I sometimes absorb 3, sometimes 7 hits.
Speedmodifiers, sure.
Damagemodifiers, sure.
All taken into account, yet still, the factor of randomness is too high.
I am fine with the downsides, higher upkeep, slower speed etc.
I dont ask for an immortal super plate warrior.
All I ask for is a general change / revision of how your protection is calculated into something more reliable (less random).
Could devs consider it, ppl. make statements (civilized) about that randomness?
-
text coming
I agree with this.
-
Awaiting epic post!
-
reply coming
-
I for one appreciate and really enjoy the randomness that comes with the fight.
If it's all super standardized, it's really about min/maxing and calculating the "ultimate" build, and then poof, cookie cutter mod.
The randomness does bring moments of outrage, and other times, a pleasant surprise.
If you want arcadey shit, I think Native does a great job of doing that. Or try the NordInvasion mod, they standardize a lot of stuff, too.
-
Are you only saying this with all of those hits hitting you on the body rather than the head? Or with different kinds of weapon damage (cut, pierce, blunt)? Or that people have varying levels of PS?
I believe weapons do a range of damage when they hit a person rather than a set amount, like 14-29 against a set amount of armor or 9-17 for a higher amount of armor. So that could account for your randomness.
The devs and the people who know far more about the mod than I do would have better answers for you though. I could be dead wrong or be partially correct for all I know.
-
Armor protection randomly goes from 50% to 100% if I remember correctly...with different factors coming to play.
@Dexxta:
You obv. cant read and obv. dont know what arcade is.
Thanks for sharing that.
-
of course there's gonna be some randomness the game has to abstract whether or not stuff like a swing hits a weak spot like a joint in armour, and whether vital organs/arteries get hit. The models only have like 5 hitboxes, not a 100 that would be needed to more accurately simulate all those variables.
-
So you should be able to take 7 hits of damage before you die? What about the other person's powerstrike or speed bonus? Its not as random as you think. Someone mold their characters in order to maximize the damage they do by stacking strength, running at you full speed or simply using a blunt or pierce weapon.
If it wasn't for your "heavy armor" you would have died in the first or second hit. That armor made the difference for the rest.
-
The more randomness the less skill factor involved. Luck should not be a deciding factor when two players clash.
-
The more randomness the less skill factor involved. Luck should not be a deciding factor when two players clash.
There is a factor of 'randomness' in real combat, when both combatants are moving, attacking and defending, two hits are rarely ever the same, as skilled as one might be, you cannot control what your enemy does, you can throw a perfectly timed and aimed punch but it doesn't mean it's going to hit your opponent and if it does it might be a glancing blow or he might ride the punch to take some of the power out of it.
Where medieval combat is concerned, your weapon hitting someones armour can have very different reactions on each occasion, the angle it hits it at, the power it hits with, etc, 99.9% or more of men on a battlefield, are not able to swing EXACTLY the same each time, with exact the same power, in exactly the same spot ( due to the factors previously stated ), thus there is a randomness, I like how the game simulates this. Would you like it so your weapon does an EXACT amount of damage each time it hits someone and relies only upon the damage multipliers of locational hits? sounds like an MMORPG. *madeforfighting hits you for 17 damage* *madeforfighting hits you for 17 damage* *madeforfighting hits you for 17 damage* *madeforfighting hits you for 17 damage* and so on, lol.
Randomness is the closest this engine can do to real combat. Plus the last time I checked only shit players relied on "luck" i.e random spam, to actually hit their opponents.
-
Fuck randomness.
-
Would you like it so your weapon does an EXACT amount of damage each time it hits someone and relies only upon the damage multipliers of locational hits?
Warband already has speed bonus, hold bonus, and sweet spot modifiers (in addition to the already mentioned locational damage). There is no need for randomness.
Easiest solution would be to fix all of the random factors to their average result. That way nothing is buffed or nerfed.
-
Raw damage(without armor) isn't randomised much, it's between 90 and 100%. For both armor soak and reduction calculation, the armor value gets a good chunk of randomness with being between 45 to 100% of the shown value. It's Native and not changed yet with WSE as far as I know.
Quoted from another thread
I'd rather it wasn't random to keep it as player skill based as possible. Damage should come from the way you play rather than random number generators behind the scenes. Its not like its a realism thing either imo, hits would either penetrate and severally wound/kill someone or not penetrate and do zero damage (maybe some blunt damage,bruises,stunned for a sec etc). So we're dealing with a system that is inherently unrealistic anyway, adding random damage doesn't change that
-
There is a factor of 'randomness' in real combat, when both combatants are moving, attacking and defending, two hits are rarely ever the same, as skilled as one might be, you cannot control what your enemy does, you can throw a perfectly timed and aimed punch but it doesn't mean it's going to hit your opponent and if it does it might be a glancing blow or he might ride the punch to take some of the power out of it.
Where medieval combat is concerned, your weapon hitting someones armour can have very different reactions on each occasion, the angle it hits it at, the power it hits with, etc, 99.9% or more of men on a battlefield, are not able to swing EXACTLY the same each time, with exact the same power, in exactly the same spot ( due to the factors previously stated ), thus there is a randomness, I like how the game simulates this. Would you like it so your weapon does an EXACT amount of damage each time it hits someone and relies only upon the damage multipliers of locational hits? sounds like an MMORPG. *madeforfighting hits you for 17 damage* *madeforfighting hits you for 17 damage* *madeforfighting hits you for 17 damage* *madeforfighting hits you for 17 damage* and so on, lol.
Randomness is the closest this engine can do to real combat. Plus the last time I checked only shit players relied on "luck" i.e random spam, to actually hit their opponents.
Thats why theres speed bonus, atleast the randomness w/o speed bonus could be lessened a bit.
-
Hi folks.
cRPG being under heavy revision, mechanics get changed, there s a lot happening.
Thanks to the devs at this place.
Now, one thing that I want to sort out:
No topic for useless lobbying or realism discussion, please
You choose your armor according to your preferences and needs on the battlefield.
Heavy armor is supposed to protect you better. Heavy is defined weight 20 + for me.
Mostly you ll add heavy gloves and helmets.
All in all a heavy loadout, accounting for 30 or more weight (allrdy considering multipliers for head and hands)
High weight, high upkeep, higher protection.
We can agree that there is some benefits and reasons to choose heavy armor
WHY I WRITE THIS:
With all the supposed benefits, one thing doesnt make any sense:
The randomness in the effective values your armor will protect you.
In 69 bodyarmor I sometimes absorb 3, sometimes 7 hits.
Speedmodifiers, sure.
Damagemodifiers, sure.
All taken into account, yet still, the factor of randomness is too high.
I am fine with the downsides, higher upkeep, slower speed etc.
I dont ask for an immortal super plate warrior.
All I ask for is a general change / revision of how your protection is calculated into something more reliable (less random).
Could devs consider it, ppl. make statements (civilized) about that randomness?
vMega... you talk about randomness! finally somebody!
I will tell you 4 stories.
1st - I had 65 body armour 57 head armour and 55 leg armour 20 str and 3 or 4 IF and got 1hitted by guy with flamberge and 9PS... Even "The_Moster" with his 12 or 13 PS can't 1hit me... -> randomness
2nd - It's siege. I am on the walls I get shot and I lose 25% hp, then I get HS from not big distance from sb with +0 Longbow and +0 Bodkins probably because after the HS I had still like 30% hp and if that guy shot me again with his longbow and bodkins (both +0 I bet) I would be still alive with like 1-4 hp. I had again 57 head armour 65 body armour and 55 leg armour and 18 str and 6IF
3rd - I have 20+ str and 4+IF and again 57-65-55 and Hetman 1shot me from his +3hornbow with +3 bodkins and 7 PD
4th - story I had again 18str and 6IF or something like that 57-65-55 armour and I got shot by Feddy with his +3 Horn bow and (probably+3) bodkins from medium distance if I remember properly and I lost 50% hp
Please reveal if 2 more PD makes such a difference or was it just the randomness of armour/damage?
Edit: Also I got 1shotted from light crossbow with my 6IF 57-65-55
change the random amount of armour to 70-100% pleaseee. Sometimes I feel like if the game had no rules for dmg/protection.
-
I think most of the people hit the nail on the head.
You say sometimes you take 3 hits, sometimes 7. It's not random, where are you getting hit those 7 times versus those 3 times (head, body or legs, and how much head body and leg armor did you have). What weapon type are they using (blunt, pierce, cut), how much base damage does the weapon do? How much momentum did they have in their swing (speed bonus)? How much power strike did the person have, how much WPF do they have for that weapon type? How much did their armor weigh, bringing down their WPF (if they are lightly armored, they are going to hit harder and faster, faster = more damage by the way also). How long did they chamber their weapon before swinging, if it was .6 seconds then it was as hard as it could hit (assuming max speed bonus), maybe the time you were hit 7 times they held their swings too long or not long enough...
So many variables come into play.
-
It's not random, where are you getting hit those 7 times versus those 3 times (head, body or legs, and how much head body and leg armor did you have).
Soak and reduce are heavily randomized (55% random). In addition, damage itself has 10% variability.
More detailed information here (http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?topic=168722.msg4090940#msg4090940)
-
Soak and reduce are heavily randomized (55% random). In addition, damage itself has 10% variability.
More detailed information here (http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?topic=168722.msg4090940#msg4090940)
Maybe I wasn't super articulate. There are lots of variables involved that are random, but there's lots of variables that are static as well. There's at least 8-10 variables involved in determining how much damage your receive from a hit.
-
It just depends whether its "randomness" thats influenced by a players actions or if its a simple toss of a dice. Now your armour is either 45% - 100% effective, which to me isn't in line with randomness brought on by speed, where you hit, powerstrike etc. If you see a tin can you should be able to reliably judge the damage you will do, or as a tin can you should know roughly how much leeway you have with taking hits. It might need some balancing though if heavy armour was more reliable
-
The "Randomness" thing what makes the game more hard to guess, and brings more depth in it. Before marching to the battle, you can never know what will happen. So it must stay in my opinion.
Armor is not a weapon, it is a precaution.
-
There is a pretty decent dmg randomizer as I understand it form Walt's research...applied after other factors.
Some people have complained about it before.
-
The "Randomness" thing what makes the game more hard to guess, and brings more depth in it. Before marching to the battle, you can never know what will happen. So it must stay in my opinion.
Armor is not a weapon, it is a precaution.
And then 1 team wins 30-0 when it comes to tickets, next round there is 0-25... fuck randomising.
-
And then 1 team wins 30-0 when it comes to tickets, next round there is 0-25... fuck randomising.
It's not THAT random you smartass and you know that.
-
Some ppl. know what I am trying to point out. (BlueKnight, Leesin,Grumbs)
It indeed is the difference in soak etc. being 55% that doesnt make sense to me.
I play long enough to estimate what hit me, amount of speedbonus etc. and even with that I often wonder badly.
So no need for explaining basics, thanks, but the question remains:
Why do we have such a big random number, rendering heavy armor useless too often?
I wouldn´t even mind if the upkeep is higher accroding to the changes of this value :-)
-
I can see why people would want randomness on soak/reduce removed, but if you do that, cut will be even worse. Blunt/pierce damage is already FAR superior to cut. This would create an even larger gap between cut and everything else. It's not THAT big of a deal for 2h/poles, but any change to soak/reduce values REALLY hurts 1h swords.
-
save crpg
buff armor
nerf ranged
-
I wouldn't mind seeing all armour take some nerf (-10 or so) if damage was less random, or more movement encumbrance for heavy armour
-
(...)in real combat(...)
Sorry, had to stop reading after this. :(
-
Heavy armor is great, but only if you're str build with lot of hp.
-
Quoted from another thread
I'd rather it wasn't random to keep it as player skill based as possible. Damage should come from the way you play rather than random number generators behind the scenes. Its not like its a realism thing either imo, hits would either penetrate and severally wound/kill someone or not penetrate and do zero damage (maybe some blunt damage,bruises,stunned for a sec etc). So we're dealing with a system that is inherently unrealistic anyway, adding random damage doesn't change that
You contradict yourself.
Anyway: This is whine thread from armour crutcher. The random factor ADDS to realism, and adds to game ejoyablity. Im sorry that you feel you should be immune to 1handed swords, but the randomness attemps to simulate that weapons vs armour is not a scientific test: stabbing at the joints on plate armour, maybe first few times I bruise you and make you lose balance (low dmg, whiffs, stuns), but then luckily I manage to stab RIGHT into the joint and mess you up (Very low soak roll, with good stab in sweetspot) and you are dead. Equally, lightly armoured guys will die 90% of the time to 1hit from a maul. One time in 10 they will get lucky by postioning, and JUST survive the maul. Maybe IRL the mauler's hand slipped, he misjudged the distanace or speed and didnt land a very heavy hit on his enemy, but it was still a maul so it did a lot of damage, but the enemy might just be able to walk away, with only a crushed shoulder.
-
Not sure where I contradicted myself. For 1 handers you might do 1-30 damage now on a hit, I would propose bringing the range closer together which I expect would actually be a buff for 1 handers. So instead of 1-30, 15-20 or something like that. Its just the large randomness I don't like from a principle point of view. If you have 2 virtually equally skilled players I would hope the player who made the fewest mistakes would win, rather than the guy who rolled the highest dice scores
Just bringing the soak values from 45%-100% of armour to 75-100 might be a good change. Or making the minimum damage generally higher somehow
-
Not sure where I contradicted myself. For 1 handers you might do 1-30 damage now on a hit, I would propose bringing the range closer together which I expect would actually be a buff for 1 handers. So instead of 1-30, 15-20 or something like that. Its just the large randomness I don't like from a principle point of view. If you have 2 virtually equally skilled players I would hope the player who made the fewest mistakes would win, rather than the guy who rolled the highest dice scores
Just bringing the soak values from 45%-100% of armour to 75-100 might be a good change. Or making the minimum damage generally higher somehow
Hmm, again contradict, if you increase soak then 1hander will do 1-20, instead of 1-30.
Decide what you want, think what that means, then post.
-
I also said on the previous page I would suggest a general reduction in armour amount. Rather than your armour being between 45-100% of its value, I would put it more like 80-100% but reduce the max armour amount at the same time. So range of damage would be less random
All I care about is that for any hit the outcome is less random than now, more predictable based on the variables presented to the player. The way its done i'm not that bothered about, but I don't want to nerf 1 h or buff heavy armour directly, just more uniform damage
-
Only use armour has is against teammates. :lol:
-
Only use armour has is against teammates. :lol:
Thats why I wear it.
-
all metal armour is heavy and you should be ashamed of wearing it. Real men fight in rags or pajamas and die in 1-2 hits.
-
Save us!
My armor feels so useless, so many times !
-
Keep randomness at a minimum.
-
Only use armour has is against teammates. :lol:
Yeah you should try gettin one trolololool :lol:
-
The random factor (...) adds to game ejoyablity
I'd enjoy the overall experience more if I'd have a say in the case of me failing or not. The game gives me excuses for being dead, instead putting all the blame on me. Again, more randomness means less skill factor, and thats the strongest argument I can ever come up with I guess. Not saying randomness is something that has to go - its how the developers want it to be and im gonna dance to their music, but i'd prefer it to be gone, or minimalised.
-
I also said on the previous page I would suggest a general reduction in armour amount. Rather than your armour being between 45-100% of its value, I would put it more like 80-100% but reduce the max armour amount at the same time. So range of damage would be less random
All I care about is that for any hit the outcome is less random than now, more predictable based on the variables presented to the player. The way its done i'm not that bothered about, but I don't want to nerf 1 h or buff heavy armour directly, just more uniform damage
THIS.
-
Randomness is the closest this engine can do to real combat. Plus the last time I checked only shit players relied on "luck" i.e random spam, to actually hit their opponents.
so you're saying that most of cRPGs more successful players are actually 'shit players'?
if yes, then i like your way of thinking. we should get rid of that randomness, right?
if not, then i have to tell you that in actual medieval combat randomness was no deciding factor unless fighters of equal skill and equipment were fighting, but as far as i know the ruling class, the wealthy people, had the means to get the best armor there was and were save with it, while everyone else was fucked. unless they were too stupid to retreat if odds are bad, but that is also not random and is not the topic.
if you want this game to be skill-based, then you should make it as anti-gambling as possible.
-
if you want this game to be skill-based, then you should make it as anti-gambling as possible.
Which obviously is wanted since OP, unbalanced stuff is getting a revision...