re:Combat update

[Dresan]

Due to the previous parry/shield-use change, some people were experiencing excessive damage from attacks. This has been fixed.

Everyone has a small chance to parry blows, even if you don't have the skill.

It's now possible to block more than one attack with shield use.

Mounted combat isn't as hard as it was before.

Please send your feedback to morgenes@armageddon.org and mud@armageddon.org.

I love youz...err...I mean good job.  

One question though, my PC has been in a few combat situations recently when did or when will these changes take place exactly? Just so i can test them out and compare what combat was like before this change and even before the bug fix.

Thanks in advance.

[Morgenes]

We crashed this evening, so they went in around then.  Go to the armageddon.org website and look at the uptime, then do the math  (Sorry I don't know the exact time we crashed)

[jmordetsky]

First glance, it seems a much nicer balance.

*claps*

[ThirdEye]

Nice.

[Beux]

Whoo. this sounds like good news to me. I have been getting my ass handed to me by every single goddamn critter in the known world since the original changes. I shall be testing out the newness tonight.

[Ktavialt]

I like that mounted combat is more feasible, stuff in relation to
mounts and combat needed to be fixed.

Thanks, the rest looks great too.

- Ktavialt

[najdorf]

Mounted combat isn't as hard as it was before.

While it is the subject, i would like to state:

Mounted combat should be more complicated than it is now,
rider can get bonus in mounted vs infantry (short-weapon wielder)
rider can get penalty in mounted vs pikeman (long spear wielders)
trampling your mount over sb can take out more hp and stun, especially if mount is running.
trampling a mount over sb can disarm victim
a skill can be added: mounted fighting
some mounts can make special attacks

[Beux]

Mounts can do, well, I was gonna some stuff, but really only one thing. Though I agree, I think someone who is a SKILLED rider should get a bonus from being mounted, unskilled riders, however, should get a penalty.

And yeh, more cool stuff with mounts would be ace.

[Quirk]

Mounted combat isn't as hard as it was before.

While it is the subject, i would like to state:

Mounted combat should be more complicated than it is now,
rider can get bonus in mounted vs infantry (short-weapon wielder)
rider can get penalty in mounted vs pikeman (long spear wielders)
trampling your mount over sb can take out more hp and stun, especially if mount is running.
trampling a mount over sb can disarm victim
a skill can be added: mounted fighting
some mounts can make special attacks

This has been mentioned before. Earth cavalry's advantages depended largely on having stirrups, so the penalties all round that exist for Zalanthan riders who lack stirrups are actually pretty realistic.

There used to be special attacks tied to the "pull reins" command on some mounts, but these were taken out as apparently they were being abused.

[jstorrie]

Earth cavalry isn't completely dependent on stirrups. I would also be in favour of mounted combat giving penalties to the unskilled, but bonuses to the very skilled, rather than giving penalties to everyone and just lesser penalties to the very skilled.

[Quirk]

Earth cavalry isn't completely dependent on stirrups. I would also be in favour of mounted combat giving penalties to the unskilled, but bonuses to the very skilled, rather than giving penalties to everyone and just lesser penalties to the very skilled.

True, but the few forces that were successful at mounted combat without stirrups employed slightly different tactics as I understand it. The Companions of Alexander the Great excelled in charging down foot troops and thrusting at them with their lances, relying on their saddle to prevent them sliding backward (couching their lance medieval knight style would, of course, have knocked them off their horse); however, if they ended up stuck in a melee battle, they were often quickly unhorsed.

[Dresan]

If your mounted, depending on the creature (ex. sunbacks and beetles), there should be a chance the creature attacks (success &damage depends on riding skill). It would be no different then combat script gear.

Otherwise i'm just glad getting attacked on your mount isn't potentially instant death anymore.

[spawnloser]

One of the powers of cavalry was that they attacked as a group.  50 cavalry vs 50 infantry is a MUCH different situattion than 1 cavalry vs 1 infantry.  Firstly, it's not actually that difficult to dive out of the way of that 1 cavalry.

I'm fine with mounted combat not giving bonuses at any skill level.  Nowhere have I ever seen a unit of cavalry that should get the bonuses.  I've only seen one mounted combatant at a time...ever.

[Nao]

Who says that stirrups are nonexistant?

It's a simple concept and definitely diable from jsut leathers. And we got saddles, even coded saddle objects.

[Agent_137]

if they exist, mounted zalanthan combat is seriously unrealistic.

see here for detailed discussion of stirrups
http://www.zalanthas.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=22788

[Dalmeth]

Who says that stirrups are nonexistant?

It's a simple concept and definitely diable from jsut leathers. And we got saddles, even coded saddle objects.

That's like saying, "Why haven't they always existed?"

They were an innovation that improved riding.  They are not strictly required for it.  So it is entirely possible that they were never invented.

[Cyrian20]

Who says that stirrups are nonexistant?

It's a simple concept and definitely diable from jsut leathers. And we got saddles, even coded saddle objects.

That's like saying, "Why haven't they always existed?"

They were an innovation that improved riding.  They are not strictly required for it.  So it is entirely possible that they were never invented.

True that, I forget who it was the British fought, but they didn't have stirrups and these other guys did, it allowed them to stand and deliver more force into a swing. So to back your statement, they weren't needed. There could be none in existance, especially if mounted combat isn't as big on Zalanthas (perhaps having them can lower your modifier for mounted combat if we add them)

[Agent_137]

*grumbles*

read the other thread, please:

http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi476.htm

The history of the use of the horse in battle is divided into three periods: first, that of the charioteer; second, that of the mounted warrior who clings to his steed by pressure of the knees; and third, that of the rider equipped with stirrups.

Horsemen didn't have stirrups. Without them, they couldn't fight on horseback. Swing a sword, or run a lance, and you fall off your horse. You could get into position quickly on a horse. But then, unless you were crazy, you got off and fought on foot.

If zalanthas DOES have stirrups, the aren't factored into the mount code, that's for sure.

======


http://www.classicalfencing.com/articles/shock.php

this is an even better article with empirical evidence.

It states that a high backed saddle is far more critical than stirrups to effecting a lance charge.

Useful, yes. But are they [stirrups] "necessary" for the shock of the charge with couched lance? Not especially. To test the effect of the stirrups, one has only to remove them from the saddle and try the pass without them. I have accomplished many successful passes at the quintain without stirrups, with no appreciative loss in the force of impact.

The stirrups are extremely useful for lateral support, and "standing" in the hand to hand fighting of a melee likely to follow a charge.

But then, he states that, actually, he can do it all bareback. :\

The tendency then, is for some researchers to see the saddle as being necessary for the delivery of the blow with the couched lance. Without the saddle, they believe, the couched lance charge is impossible. To test this, I removed the saddle, and made several repeated passes at the quintain. By utilizing a "Clenched Seat" position, I was able to deliver sufficient force to topple the target and ride on, safe and sound.

Ok, so i stopped reading about 2/3s of the way through, i have work to do, but it seems like shock combat, charging with lances, is possible without strirrup and saddle through great skill. But to continue fighting mounted is incredibly difficult and ineffective without stirrups.

Thus, mounted combat in zalanthas is as it should be, sans stirrups. We already have a charge skill.

[X-D]

Completly ignoring the mounted conversation going on here since not playing a pc that would ever willingly fight unless solidly on the ground.

But the other changes are nice. Though I still don't see any real point to delays to draw/sheath/ep/es/etwo blah blah, its not so slap in the face annoying as when it was first added.  Parry and shield seem about right, though the current block message is so dry and simply Blah and it "seems" that there is only the one message now.

You deftly block..over and over and over
Least before there was at least two messages you could get on a block with a shield.

Daze seems good, almost to the point where I might start considering it an addition to the game instead of a subtraction..unlike draw/sheath delay and archery stam drain, which I'm quite sure I'll always consider a subtration or simply a pointless waste of coding time.

My current hope though is that these are all simply the first little baby steps in a greater plan to make a far more dynamic and robust combat system allowing styles and even greater differences on the races and weapon types etc and also allowing even more pre-combat strategy and MUCH more during combat strategy while still leaving enough time to at least toss in an emote now and again.

[Sokotra]

Parry and shield seem about right, though the current block message is so dry and simply Blah and it "seems" that there is only the one message now.

You deftly block..over and over and over
Least before there was at least two messages you could get on a block with a shield.

Yeah, I agree... I guess that is one reason I was suggesting some other special moves and stuff to spice things up, make them more interesting.  Using emotes is a good way to do this, but it's nice to have that 'coded' support for the realistic RP in Arm that we so love.  Maybe some submissions for the coded echo you get when you parry or block with a shield are needed.  I think there's other places where the coded echo could use a few more random messages added... I think backstab was one of them we were talking about changing/supplementing.

I'm glad to see the work being done on the combat system, though, and I'm sure there's some more tweaking to be done.    One problem I've noticed is that something seems wrong with the code that detects whether you are standing or not during combat which may be causing some extra damage being done to the victim of this 'glitch'.

I could be wrong, but I noticed when you try to "stand kank" while you are fighting, it says "You must be standing for you to order your kank."  or some message like that, seeming to suggest that I was on the ground, which I wasn't.  I seemed to be getting hammered alot more than usual, also, so I hope the code isn't thinking you are on the ground and applying the penalty as such.

[Morgenes]

I could be wrong, but I noticed when you try to "stand kank" while you are fighting, it says "You must be standing for you to order your kank."  or some message like that, seeming to suggest that I was on the ground, which I wasn't.  I seemed to be getting hammered alot more than usual, also, so I hope the code isn't thinking you are on the ground and applying the penalty as such.

There is a bug, but it's not what you think.  Without going to in depth into the code, (check out any stock DIKU code and you will see this) the positions your character is in is represented by a number.  The way it's coded the fighting position is less than the standing position.  This is to keep you from doing certain things while you're fighting, including ordering your kank to stand.  We will adjust the message to be more clear that it's because you're fighting.

[Dalmeth]

Well, I'll just ask this since this is the best place to do it :  Was the wielding delay supposed to apply when you are pulling arrows?

[Yang]

Well, I'll just ask this since this is the best place to do it :  Was the wielding delay supposed to apply when you are pulling arrows?

Ouch!

[Dalmeth]

Ouch!

It isn't so bad, just an extra second or so, but it does make bows less useful in stressful situations.