Pending Change to Charge

[spawnloser]

I support this change 100%.

[SMuz]

I support this change. With a mounted combatant, I would want to charge a creature multiple times. But I won't, because that's abusing the code just the way that spam kicking would. With this change, I can charge a creature multiple times without guilt and it handles the stamina cost as well. More believability. I like it.

[jmordetsky]

I'll play around with the code change and see if I have any feedback to give.  At this point I think that some of the npc's I used to hunt would be impossible without a quiver full of arrows.  I guess I'll have to develop other strategies or rely more on archery... shrug.

>flee

A raptor has arrived from the east.

>charge raptor

>flee

A raptor has arrived from the east.

>charge raptor

>flee

A raptor has arrived from the north.
A raptor has arrived from the east.

>think Fuck.

>flee

It'll work.

Find myself wondering if disengage allows another charge.

[brytta.leofa]

Find myself wondering if disengage allows another charge.

Sounds like it does, if you're not--excuse the term--tanking.  If Mr. and Mrs. Raptor are busy clawing your companion rather than you.

[Qzzrbl]

So.... After this change-- other than having that -one- charge that you initiate combat with, and have to leave combat to use again, will there be any bonuses to mounted combat?

It seems to be negatives all across the line so far, except for charge.

[Morgenes]

So.... After this change-- other than having that -one- charge that you initiate combat with, and have to leave combat to use again, will there be any bonuses to mounted combat?

It seems to be negatives all across the line so far, except for charge.

With this change, no, with other pending changes that haven't been announced because we're still discussing them, perhaps.

[Agent_137]

maybe i've been out of the combat based character too long. i forgot what was so wrong about spamming coded attack, especially against NPCs.

there is already a hefty delay on charge. has that been tweaked or removed? Because now it'll be:

charge
target hopefully is knocked down.
wait.
target stands up.
flee east
west
charge

it just seems the delay was already added to represent the whole 'turning your mount around' thing.

dunno, maybe the delay works with the pending implementation, but i hope it's compared to movement lag and attack lag so that the potential target can't nullify charge by attacking first.

[5 day lifespan]

I guess I'm upset because apparently I am one of the few people who DIDN'T use charge in this way and DIDN'T see it as teh best skill EVAR.  But then I did see a carru knocked on his ass BY my charge, then horrifically gore me for mor than half my hit points.  I only charged once, MAYBE twice a combat.  Twice being more likely if it was a bigger thing (read: more HP) and there was another hunter there and we were fighting in tandem.  Now I find out I had a backstab this whole time?  Crap.  Oh well.  Still would have done what seemed to make sense. 

I REALLY like the charging from another room idea.  ALOT.

[Majikal]

The fact that I just watched this be used in a kill while it's been quoted by staff as being abusive is very, very upsetting. Watched a victim be unable to stand or even draw a weapon while they were charged to death small bits of hp at a time. I'm happy for this change 100%.

[Sephiroto]

For some reason I think that being trampled intentionally by a several thousand pound lizard would be quite more devistating than the few hp worth of damage it usually does.  What ever happend to mounted riders being brutal?  Ever heard of the Mongols?  What about that Hannibal guy?

People in the MMO community would call what is being done "carebear".  I don't dislike the change to charge so much as I feel it makes the skill practically useless now.  What happened if 15% of the time when you failed a backstab you fell on your face?  It seems a little stupid that a master at riding is going to fall off during a pre-planned charge that only does a few hp of damage.  Furthermore, I don't like how you can be bashed while mounted and even knocked into the next room (at least by NPC's).  Totally lame.  The charge skill could use some overhaul.

In my mind, charge would be even more brutal than it already is, but to counter, if you are riding a mount you can not be bashed or charged.  Don't want to get pounded by armed fighters on mounts?  Get your own mount. 

[brytta.leofa]

charged to death small bits of hp at a time.

I'm coming to be fairly happy with the change-- but small bits of hp at a time?  That's nuts.

I hope it was a newbie rider on a baby erdlu.

[Majikal]

The issue as it stands is pretty blatant, the charge 'lock' is so harsh that the skill itself renews before the victim snaps to and is able to move. Therefor you end up with the unlucky victim on the ground without even the ability to draw weapons, stand up, flee as was the case I witnessed. Despite the victim being far more skilled in combat than the assaulting rider.

[Sephiroto]

charged to death small bits of hp at a time.

I'm coming to be fairly happy with the change-- but small bits of hp at a time?  That's nuts.

I hope it was a newbie rider on a baby erdlu.

No, a mul on a war beetle.  Many times the targets were still relatively fit after I charged them.  The mul punched harder than most charges, honestly, and he had low strength.  I know a mul can punch pretty hard, but uh...."trampled by a war beetle" seems to suggest some form of heavy damage.  War beetles aren't that huge in comparison with the largest mounts, but they're no joke.  A Mini-Cooper might not kill you instantly if it hits you at 15-20mph, but it can still fuck you up, right?

I think charge should do massive damage.  You're not simply knocking them over, you're literally knocking them down and stomping the shit out of them with the intent of incapacitation.  Anyway, the damage I've seen this do hasn't reflected what the message suggests.

And I don't care how athletic someone is, how big their sword is, or if they're carrying a shotgun, Majikal, if you get tackled point blank by some 800-1500 pound beast your ass is grass.

[Marc]

Therefor you end up with the unlucky victim on the ground without even the ability to draw weapons, stand up, flee as was the case I witnessed

And I don't care how athletic someone is, how big their sword is, or if they're carrying a shotgun, Majikal, if you get tackled point blank by some 800-1500 pound beast your ass is grass.

No weapon and on the ground seems a bad situation.  If it took multiple charges it probably was a lame erdlu.

[Twilight]

An 800 pound yearling isn't that hard to push around.  1500 pounds is more like a big cow, which, trust me because I've been there, isn't -that- bad to be knocked over by.

A 40 pound wolverine is probably far more dangerous (although I don't have personal experiene with wolverines).  Which is analagous.  Maybe you are using a 1500 pound cow to try to trample a 40 pound wolverine.  I think the cow would probably loose.

*adjusts his cowboy hat*

[Synthesis]

charged to death small bits of hp at a time.

I'm coming to be fairly happy with the change-- but small bits of hp at a time?  That's nuts.

I hope it was a newbie rider on a baby erdlu.

No, a mul on a war beetle.  Many times the targets were still relatively fit after I charged them.  The mul punched harder than most charges, honestly, and he had low strength.  I know a mul can punch pretty hard, but uh...."trampled by a war beetle" seems to suggest some form of heavy damage.  War beetles aren't that huge in comparison with the largest mounts, but they're no joke.  A Mini-Cooper might not kill you instantly if it hits you at 15-20mph, but it can still fuck you up, right?

I think charge should do massive damage.  You're not simply knocking them over, you're literally knocking them down and stomping the shit out of them with the intent of incapacitation.  Anyway, the damage I've seen this do hasn't reflected what the message suggests.

And I don't care how athletic someone is, how big their sword is, or if they're carrying a shotgun, Majikal, if you get tackled point blank by some 800-1500 pound beast your ass is grass.

I think it's probably a good deal easier to avoid a charging 800-1500 pound beast than the game's code really gives credit for.  It's probably a good deal easier to incapacitate someone's 800-1500 pound beast than the code really gives credit for.  This is why there's a delicate balancing act that goes in with respect to skills and abilities.  It would be nigh unplayable if you could hamstring someone's inix, or cut a foot off of someone's sunback, or impale a war beetle in the face with a voulge...so take what you have, and leave the rest.

[SmashedTregil]

In my experience, a properly skilled up charge allows you to kill someone with charge 'only'. Even if your weapons are bouncing off due to your extremely low strength or whatever. It just tends to take awhile and lots and lots and lots of charges.

Also, who said delves can evade charge consistantly? They have a greater chance of it, sure. But we're talking like ... 1 in 5 charges?

[Armaddict]

Not trying to contribute to the conversation or discussion, so I apologize, but I had to say it.

Some of you are hilarious. XD

[Niamh]

I suspect that some of you would be singing a different tune if you had to watch a character that you put days and days of playtime into die while someone was spam-charging you.

[Armaddict]

I suspect that some of you would be singing a different tune if you had to watch a character that you put days and days of playtime into die while someone was spam-charging you.

If this is the literal line of logic, nerf magick plz.

[Synthesis]

I suspect that some of you would be singing a different tune if you had to watch a character that you put days and days of playtime into die while someone was spam-charging you.

If this is the literal line of logic, nerf magick plz.

Rangers are zero karma.

[brytta.leofa]

I suspect that some of you would be singing a different tune if you had to watch a character that you put days and days of playtime into die while someone was spam-charging you.

Versus spam-disarming?  If it's problematic to use a skill repeatedly, let's get it reflected in the code, rather than casting aspersions on folks.  Or if you consider this a bug, I'm sure the poor bugger would love a resurrection.

Before this announcement, it never occured to me that charge was something that "should" only be done to initiate combat; in fact, because of mounted combat's disadvantages, I thought that charge was something you should be doing as often as possible: keep your mount moving and use it to your advantage, rather than letting your opponent use it to his.

The staff's new, authoritative interpretation of charge is very reasonable.  So was everybody else' interpretation (in line with what the code encouraged), pre-announcement.

[NoteworthyFellow]

I suspect that some of you would be singing a different tune if you had to watch a character that you put days and days of playtime into die while someone was spam-charging you.

If this is the literal line of logic, nerf magick plz.

Different situation. Entirely.

• Magick is interruptible. That means that if you survive/resist the first spell, you've at least got a shot at escaping or even winning.
• Magick is extremely powerful in-universe--and by that, I mean that the documentation casts it as extremely powerful.
• Magickers require karma. Rangers don't.
• It's the abusive nature of spam-charging that is an issue here, not the power of charge. Casting a spell on someone, a single spell, isn't abusive behavior, no matter how powerful it is. Spam-charging, or spam-disarming, or, hell, spam-anything is pretty abusive. I'm this close to advocating a short "cooldown" (sorry to use MMORPG terminology) on non-magick combat skills, only as long as can be justified realistically while still helping to avoid a spam-whatever situation.

That being said, aside from implementing cooldowns (which I realize would piss, oh, everyone but me off), I think being killed through obvious code abuse is grounds for a resurrection for the victim and harsh punishment for the perpetrator. I know resurrections are delicate situations, but this is one time when I think it's justified.

[Me]

I suspect that some of you would be singing a different tune if you had to watch a character that you put days and days of playtime into die while someone was spam-charging you.

It's always good to see staff putting effort into trying to stem code abuse and whatnots. Here's my two sids however:

At the end of the day, why nerf a certain skill to prevent code abuse? As long as there are codes, there will always be players who will be abusing them. No matter what sort of implementation or restrictions you put out on a certain coded skill, there will always be players or as we like to call "twinkers" trying to find loop holes and ways to go around it. My thought is this, simply just dish out harsher punishments when code abuse or any other un-Arm-like-ethical behavior is involved on players.

There are a lot of responsible players that do nothing but try to get everyone involved with whatever he/she/it is doing, so why nerf a skill that would affect the entire player base when only certain players (hopefully a small handful only) are not abiding to the rules? IMHO, simply just take away certain guild options  - let say Ranger Amos spam charges a hapless PC with no emotes, no rp scenes involved, no other forms of interactions. Then simply just take ranger guild away from player A, throw in a few neg notes along the way. Then watch player A very carefully.

It is very irritating and upsetting especially if a PC - as mentioned by Niamh - have invested days after days of developing the persona, working up a skill in a realistically RP-like manner, building up a social network or whatever then only to die to a PC death that involved nothing but spam charge/spam backstab/spam anything else. However, is it the fault of the code? Or is it the fault of the player that did all the spamming?

[Lizzie]

Anyway, the damage I've seen this do hasn't reflected what the message suggests.

Rather than change the skill, why not just change the messaging?

If the trample is a critical success, then the message will reflect critical damage.

If the trample only caused 5 hps damage, the message will reflect that the beetle's right leg bumped into the guy's elbow and made his funny bone tingle.

If the trample was significant but not critical, the message will reflect that the guy probably broke his leg but is otherwise intact.

And so on and so forth.