Pending Change to Charge

[jmordetsky]

You left out bash. Oops.

I don't know about bash being near 100% (I've never seen it as such a level, but I also have never seen charge at such a level) - but I would say that with Bash if you do fail, you are on the ground and a bit f@cked. I think if you fail charge, you're just chillin, charge again.

[Gunnerblaster]

I don't know about bash being near 100% (I've never seen it as such a level, but I also have never seen charge at such a level) - but I would say that with Bash if you do fail, you are on the ground and a bit f@cked. I think if you fail charge, you're just chillin, charge again.

Wrong.

The one who charges, dependent upon their ride vs. charge skills, can be very effectively thrown from the back of their own mounts, putting them in the same position they had just previously attempted to put their victim in. Also - Mounted Combatants have the chance of being thrown from the back of their mount, regardless of weither they are using Charge or not.

Even Rangers who have mastered Charge and Ride get thrown from their mounts, very much how a Warrior who has mastered Bash can still fall.

In my opinion, Charge is one of the few skills that helps seperate Rangers from the rest of the classes and this change just makes this skill practically useless unless someone has another character "tanking" for them. NPC's do not get any lag, as far as wild creatures go, and the moment they move into the same room as you - They are spam bash/slashing your face in so there goes your ability to charge and atleast level the playing field.

I realize Zalanthas is a harsh worlds but I didn't think the mounts who have spent centuries evolving in this harsh terrain would suddenly and abruptly require more room just to knock something over. I sure as hell don't see carru's ceasing their endless bash/charge combos so why not just work on that while your dumbing the Charge skill down.

[spawnloser]

I've SEEN a 2-day ranger kill a 20-day character by spam charging and locking that person out of being able to enter a command.

[Dar]

You left out bash. Oops.

What about it ? Bash has 'siginificantly' greater risks and considerably greater failure rate. Unless you're an HG, I suppose. After some point, you no longer fall off the mount if you've failed charge. After some point, you practically dont fail charge at 'all'.

[Eloran]

hat about it ?

What about it? You merely forgot to mention a skill that effectively destroys your argument.

Bash is just as much the ultimate mage killer as charge is. I've seen bash used far more effectively than charge, but again, most of these arguments are based off of anecdotal arguments as opposed to empirical evidence.

The risks are the same with bash and charge. If you fail a bash, you fall. If you critically fail a charge, you fall off your mount.

After some point, you practically dont fail charge at 'all'.

This is misleading.

You reach a point with bash where you hardly fail as well.

Charge is not a skill that is 100%. I've dodged a max ranger's charge - chalk it up to me being a wee bit faster than my opponent.

[5 day lifespan]

You left out bash. Oops.

What about it ? Bash has 'siginificantly' greater risks and considerably greater failure rate. Unless you're an HG, I suppose. After some point, you no longer fall off the mount if you've failed charge. After some point, you practically dont fail charge at 'all'.

Does Bash cause HP and massive stun damage if you fail?  I'm just asking, because charge does.  I'm not in disagreement to a needed change for charge, but perhaps in what form that change takes.  If we are going to compare bash and charge, shouldn't they operate the same way with the same bonuses and drawbacks?  Perhaps a minor bonus to charge, as it requires a mount which has other well known penalties associated with it.

All of this hurts me on a personal level, as the first skill I branched ever was charge, and I never abused it.  So to me if feels like the only present I ever got was just taken away.

[Majikal]

You left out bash. Oops.

What about it ? Bash has 'siginificantly' greater risks and considerably greater failure rate. Unless you're an HG, I suppose. After some point, you no longer fall off the mount if you've failed charge. After some point, you practically dont fail charge at 'all'.

This is true, and with bash you can't bash a downed opponent which means you have to wait until they stand to target them again, giving them a chance to stand, flee, or most importantly draw weapons why down etc. Bash also puts the assaulter sitting down with every fail where charge, once skilled (which for a ranger is often done quickly), rarely on a fail will put the ranger sitting down. The ability to charge a downed opponent before the lag allows them to input any command is the issue.

[Eloran]

Stuff.

You do realize we're on the same side, right? That being said, don't let things get to you on a personal level. It's just a game mang.

The ability to charge a downed opponent before the lag allows them to input any command is the issue.

The idea to simply create a longer delay or develop a script to pull away from your opponent before charging them once more has obviously fallen on deaf ears. Either would have been the best solution to retain the fluidity of combat.

[jhunter]

I know of someone whose fairly long-lived pc died due to some jackass and a charge lock. They quit the game and won't be returning.

[5 day lifespan]

:rereads what he wrote: Wasn't aware that anything i said implied i was attacking your stance.  And no, I am certain the staff didn't go, "Hey, what did 5dls just branch?  Parry?  Let's nerf it!"  Still sucks though.  Luckily ride also branches "forage crap..." so I still have toys to play with...

[Dalmeth]

Wouldn't this have been better if the combat capability of animals were taken into account when using charge?

Leave the large pack animals with a generally greater chance of success, but also a much greater chance of throwing the rider.  The generally smaller war mounts and can then a much less reduced chance of throwing the rider in exchange for the penalties that come from reduced size.

[Thunkkin]

I have to say, I really don't care about changing charge for pvp.  If PCs were using it to do lame abusive things to other PCs, then a change somewhere was needed.  No big whoop.

Mainly, I'm just sad about the side effect ... it seems to me that this removes a skill from the ranger's hunting toolkit, since as already mentioned, most NPCs seem to spam-attack long before you can type "charge beastie" when they enter the room or the ranger enters the creature's room.  Charge then becomes a trigger-happy, carefully-planned OOC tactic rather than something that just comes naturally while playing a ranger.

Am I wrong in this?  I haven't played a ranger in a while now.

[lingering]

Bash is just as much the ultimate mage killer as charge is. I've seen bash used far more effectively than charge, but again, most of these arguments are based off of anecdotal arguments as opposed to empirical evidence.

And yet bash can be completely avoided.  Bash's timer does not lock out the bashee longer than it does the basher.  There are more points to be made that reveal that bash is a lot weaker than charge but they do not need to be made since these two are enough to prove that an attempt to make it a one to one comparison fails.

In its current form charge is significantly more powerful and potent than bash is.  If charge were reduced to an equivalency of bash then we would not be seeing this discussion nor would we be seeing changes being made.

[Eloran]

And yet bash can be completely avoided.

So can charge. 

If charge were reduced to an equivalency of bash then we would not be seeing this discussion nor would we be seeing changes being made.

If charge were simply given a longer cooldown so that the victim had a chance to flee we wouldn't be having this discussion. Only a handful of people seem to have grasped this concept.

[Armaddict]

If charge were simply given a longer cooldown so that the victim had a chance to flee we wouldn't be having this discussion. Only a handful of people seem to have grasped this concept.

Not true.  As it was stated, the staff just don't like how the mechanic works right now.  The stun on it?  Fine.  But not while they're still getting attacks.  So now there is just one stun that you have to flee and repursue for.

It's not a bad change at all.  I just have my gripe about how one class it's deemed excessive because after they get the skill up, along with fighting skill, it gives a ranger the ability to make someone nigh helpless.  There are a multitude of other 0-karma skills that do the same thing via other mechanics, often without requiring multiple successes in a row to pull it off, too.

Rangers are still powerful.  Just still dependent on a lot more 'activity', and on hoping the other guy isn't mounted.  Which sucks.

[the traveller]

Just a heads up that due to some abuse we've seen with charge and how we as staff envision it should be used, we're altering the code to enforce this idea.  Charge isn't just turning your mount around and trampling the person again and again, instead you have to break free, get some momentum and come back at the person.  Once this change goes live, you will have to not be fighting the person you want to charge, nor can they be fighting you in order to get the charge off. 

What? No, wait.

This does seem a little drastic. Though, so is keeping an opponent in a constant state of knockdown - and we're all against that, especially in the case of PC victims. But surely there is a middle ground. Isn't there a simpler/alternate solution than implementing this decisive of a change. eg.

• reduce (or even remove) the knockdown chance if already in combat with opponent
• reduced damage if already in combat with opponent
• reduce damage and/or knockdown chance dependant on time period since last charge attempt
• reduce knockdown chance against larger (or more intelligent) foes
• a bunch of other options more creative folks would think of

So, if you're not already in combat, or you took your time to gain some momentum or similar, charge is (much) more effective. But if you are in close, and just using your mount to try and outflank, bustle, bump, or otherwise off-put your opponent, you still gain some benefit from doing so.

Maybe mounted combat techniques can all be RP'd, without any coded command, but it is nice to have some coded effect to your tactics. Having to emote all/most combat manuevers without any coded support at all (for non-warriors) is just less.... fun.

As it was stated, the staff just don't like how the mechanic works right now.

Perhaps it's not just a balance issue, as Morgenes did also state it's not how the staff envision it should be used. But then you end up with one less (of few/none) coded skills to help add flavour (and noticable effect) during a rumble. Also, does it completely unbalance things the other way, and ruin/cripple mounted combat? Which seems damned rare to begin with?

Both those concerns could be addressed by adding in new combat manuevers (with minor combat effects) later on. Something like this was also mentioned - or at least some form of mounted benefit. But maybe it would be simpler to just tweak the existing skill (and perhaps broaden it's usage/echos/intended meaning), than drastically reduce it's usage altogether, and leave us hoping for new features to add flavour and balance.

Anyhow, it's seems unlikely the decision will be altered any. Or perhaps, I'm just mental anyway.

[Riev]

Under all theories, can't you just come into a room, charge someone and knock them down... wait the like THREE seconds it takes for charge to reset, flee, keep running, and come back into the room and charge again to keep a lockdown? It would just take -longer- for everything to happen.

*mockingly* I wish combat would take longer.

[Synthesis]

Bash's timer does not lock out the bashee longer than it does the basher.

Yes it does.  Especially if it was a VERY successful bash (e.g. pulled off by something much larger than yourself).

The difference is:  you can't bash someone when they're already on the ground, so if they have stand;flee command stacked (which is likely, since they're probably spamming the 'flee' command while they're locked), you won't have a chance to pull off the second bash once they stand up...unless they fail ALL the flee commands they have stacked up, or you have such an awesome connection to ginka that you can get your next bash command in before the next "heartbeat."

[spawnloser]

the traveler, it has nothing to do with knockdown.  You get lagged as the target of a charge and could be charged again before running that lag out.  I had a character die because someone opened up combat with a charge... I typed 'stand;flee' and had NO response from the game until my character was at negative HP, the game telling me that I couldn't do anything while in that condition.  Not only that, you could charge a prone opponent meaning that people using it could spam the command with no fear.  THAT was how people were abusing charge.

The only way to change it that is a middle-ground would leave noone happy because it would completely nerf charge.  This allows people to still use it and have a way to use it repeatedly, so long as they aren't solitary twinks like the guy that killed my character.

[Majikal]

Bash's timer does not lock out the bashee longer than it does the basher.

Yes it does.  Especially if it was a VERY successful bash (e.g. pulled off by something much larger than yourself).

The difference is:  h98u9834298STUFF893842838oajdad

This is a world of difference, that difference alone is what makes bash impossible to abuse.

[the traveller]

the traveler, it has nothing to do with knockdown.  You get lagged as the target of a charge and could be charged again before running that lag out.

Umm, isn't that the game effect of knockdown? The lag is in place to prevent a player from immediately standing back up. So when I use the term knockdown, I'm referring to the time until you are functional/back on your feet.

I had a character die because someone opened up combat with a charge... I typed 'stand;flee' and had NO response from the game until my character was at negative HP, the game telling me that I couldn't do anything while in that condition.  Not only that, you could charge a prone opponent meaning that people using it could spam the command with no fear.  THAT was how people were abusing charge.

Yes, and we're all for changing this - I'd hate losing a char that way too. But there are lots of way to accomplish it that don't basically remove the skill from most/many situtations (or forcing anyone that wants to use it more often, to perform the cheesy flee; charge; flee; charge;).

Why remove the only in-combat skill the character might have, one that adds both flavour and some coded effect, and an ability that helps makes mounted combat somewhat more usable? This seems rather harsh. Note, my concerns are for primarily keeping a coded combat tehnique when battling creatures/NPCs.

The only way to change it that is a middle-ground would leave noone happy because it would completely nerf charge.

This doesn't seem logical to me.

Surely a reduced/removed knockdown (target delay) chance and or duration seems a nicer alternative. If you make time/space and give your mount more of a run-up, it has a stronger effect. If you just try it in close, it's more likely to just bump your target, or knock him off balance for only a brief period.

Again, maybe it's not the true intent of the word charge, but being able to use your mount to your advantage feels appropriate (at least against creatures). Maybe you shouldn't be able to perform multiple bumps/charges against an intelligent (humanoid?) opponent. After a while, they'll figure out how to use the terrain to avoid it.

[brytta.leofa]

Make a successful charge stop the victim's attacks (like reel) and allow the rider to totally disengage.  Obviously this requires delay-tweaking to make sure we're not right back in the same situation as before.

Anyway, the whole discussion's moot at this point.

[the traveller]

Anyway, the whole discussion's moot at this point.

Probably so, but then, Morgenes did initaite this thread, so I guess we get to comment as we like for now, even if it is likely for nought.

Hmm, perhaps just:

• an additional (soft) delay before the charge (like, maybe 5-10 seconds?)

Either, only when already in combat, or all the time even. So you take a few moments (and have time for emotes as you like) to try and manuever your mount, make some space, turn to front your target, then you get to try the charge.

[Riev]

I'm only going to ask this once:

What, exactly, is the problem with having to disengage? In multiple-combatant situations, if you are not taking the damage, you can simply type 'disengage;charge man' and do what this has suggested anyways.

I ask, because I can't help but think that the people vehemently against this nerf, have been either abusing it in the way staff has suggested, or just want something to complain about.

[Thunkkin]

I ask, because I can't help but think that the people vehemently against this nerf, have been either abusing it in the way staff has suggested, or just want something to complain about.

Sometimes rangers solo-hunt?

But, honestly ... I'm not sure that stating your suspicion that everyone who disagrees with you is either abusing the code or trolling is going to lead to fruitful discussion.