Combat Skill Progression Revamped

[Clearsighted]

I think Armageddon would be in a better place, if the rate of your advancement in certain Combat and Weapon related skills, was predicated more on the raw lethality of your opponent, and rather less on their quickness.

By which I mean, fundamentally, we would all be better served if skill advancement was more of a risk vs reward scenario, such as say, benefiting more from tackling a salt worm as opposed to a 'insert something weaker yet quicker than a salt worm'.

I am not referring to Off/Def.

Why?

Why should anyone care about this topic? Well. Because Armageddon is a harsh world, where death owing to a variety of factors (PK, critters, lag, bugs, unfairness) is always just around the corner - and no one gives a shit if you eat it. No one will resurrect you if you accidentally walk through the Nak city gates with a tube of spice you didn't realize someone gave you while semi-idle, and then got butchered. And since it takes a colossal amount of time compared to a gicker, to create a mundane that can defend themselves when those crazy situations crop up, people will always have an incentive to figure out the most efficient ways of skilling themselves.

Unfortunately, Armageddon's combat system doesn't really have an 'efficient but twinky' vs 'inefficient but good' route to mastery. It very quickly reaches a glass ceiling where the only possibility of progression requires a...somewhat creative understanding of game mechanics. Additionally, you have incentives to appreciate those mechanics, if you want to keep playing your character over the longer term. At least if that character is in a combat-exposed role.

What I'd like to see is a philosophy that is as simple and elegant as the magicker side of things. A newbie magicker has an equal chance of fully maxing and branching their character as a veteran, given even the slightest clue. It'd be great if mundanes were in a similar place: Hey man, fight dangerous stuff, get more dangerous!. Not, 'Hey man, fight <this specific critter>, get more dangerous.'

[BadSkeelz]

It'd just make indie spam hunters even more lethal, esp when compared to city-bound characters that are ostensibly being trained to be lethal.

[Clearsighted]

It'd just make indie spam hunters even more lethal, esp when compared to city-bound characters that are ostensibly being trained to be lethal.

That philosophy is certainly how we've gotten to the present incarnation of requiring ludicrous means of keeping people below advanced. But I'd hazard a suggestion that you're actually better off forcing indie hunters to tackle more lethal creatures, and that it would actually have the reverse effect that you're implying.

It takes teamwork - the kind of teamwork you can only find in established clans - to tackle the really dangerous stuff in the game.

What makes indie hunters both powerful and viable, is that they are typically played by vets that know where to find the relatively harmless critters they can reach mastery on, while avoiding the dangerous ones. The solution isn't removing these critters, as they're currently the only means of advancement. Otherwise, everyone would just play gickers. The solution is changing the incentive to something more realistic - fighting more dangerous creatures.

I imagine the Legion with their kryl-hunting patrols would have been much better served than some indie dwarf trying to do as such.

[Synthesis]

There's one simple fix to this, and I'm sure the Staff are aware of it.  It's a "problem" that's been griped about for at least a decade, and if it hasn't been changed yet, I doubt it ever will be.  The admins basically don't want sparring alone to be a viable option for achieving mastery in weapon and wield skills.

Once you get beyond that basic fix and the fundamental premise behind it, every other proposal is just moving the cheese around to another location that will piss off a different subset of players.

(I'm not going to elaborate on the nature of the fix, or the problem behind it, because it basically gives away the strategy for gaming the current system.)

[Patuk]

Synthesis is probably right in saying that if people really wanted this fixed, it could have been done a while ago. What remains is meta reasons to keep combat as it is.

And although I trust the playerbase enough to think that it wouldn't be too big a deal, well.. I kiiiiiinda can see why staff would want to be apprehensive about the thought of maxed warriors/rangers running about everywhere. Merchants may well go extinct if that were to ever happen.

[Clearsighted]

Synthesis is probably right in saying that if people really wanted this fixed, it could have been done a while ago. What remains is meta reasons to keep combat as it is.

And although I trust the playerbase enough to think that it wouldn't be too big a deal, well.. I kiiiiiinda can see why staff would want to be apprehensive about the thought of maxed warriors/rangers running about everywhere. Merchants may well go extinct if that were to ever happen.

It's a good point, but I just don't see it as a logical conclusion from the 'fight more dangerous stuff to be dangerous' thrust of my suggestion. But even if that were the case, I'd rather see people get there from fighting rantarri, meks and kryl, than from say...something much weaker and quicker.

There's also no reason why it couldn't be tweaked in such a way as to remain the same soul-crushing grind, and to safely assure newbies won't get that far. (Another reason why the first thing a newbie should do is spec app a gemmer if they really want to get plugged into a playerbase that often only values you if you bring something valuable to the table).

[Synthesis]

The problem is:  how do you translate "more dangerous" into code.  I'm assuming what you mean is "if something hits you a lot" or "if something hits you hard" then it's "dangerous."  So you have to set a threshold for what constitutes a skillable hit.

All you've done is set up a new metagame.  Now people will go out and fight and spar mostly unarmored to make sure they hit the damage threshold for skilling up.  Dwarf sparring partners will be the best, instead of elf.  People will ride out to dangerous things just to get hit by them a few times before they flee.  Agile PCs will be at a disadvantage because they take less damage fewer times.  Etc. etc. etc.  It's just moving the cheese.  It's not really even more dangerous, unless you set the bar at "you have to be reeled to generate a skillup," and then it would be so dangerous that we'd get epic-level bitching and moaning as soon as the reality of the situation set in amongst the playerbase.

(If you think I'm joking or overreacting...before the defense nerf, and before the reel code, "intentionally getting pinched by a bahamet" was a fairly common metagame tactic.)

[wizturbo]

Current system isn't perfect, but a new system won't be either.

If it ain't terribly horribly broken, don't fix it.  I don't think Arm's is terribly horribly broken...so....

[Clearsighted]

The problem is:  how do you translate "more dangerous" into code.  I'm assuming what you mean is "if something hits you a lot" or "if something hits you hard" then it's "dangerous."  So you have to set a threshold for what constitutes a skillable hit.

All you've done is set up a new metagame.  Now people will go out and fight and spar mostly unarmored to make sure they hit the damage threshold for skilling up.  Dwarf sparring partners will be the best, instead of elf.  People will ride out to dangerous things just to get hit by them a few times before they flee.  Agile PCs will be at a disadvantage because they take less damage fewer times.  Etc. etc. etc.  It's just moving the cheese.  It's not really even more dangerous, unless you set the bar at "you have to be reeled to generate a skillup," and then it would be so dangerous that we'd get epic-level bitching and moaning as soon as the reality of the situation set in amongst the playerbase.

(If you think I'm joking or overreacting...before the defense nerf, and before the reel code, "intentionally getting pinched by a bahamet" was a fairly common metagame tactic.)

I don't see anything you've said here as a joke or a overreaction. But I'd rather have the metagame cheese revolve around something that instinctively makes sense, as opposed to revolving around something that only really benefits those 'in the know'.

Again, I use the gicker system as an example. That makes perfect sense, and even a newbie can quickly grasp it.

[Synthesis]

"Practicing hitting something that is hard to hit makes me better at hitting things" makes a whole lot of intuitive sense, especially in the context of how every other skillup mechanic in the game works (except one, maybe, but I don't have an exact working knowledge of that).

I guess a workaround would be to re-jigger the stats and combat skills on critters such that new-butthole-tearing efficiency always scales with evasiveness (not necessarily vice-versa).  That way, every critter that could potentially give you a skillup at advanced or master level would also be able to seriously fuck you up.  That would be a pretty massive undertaking, though...a bunch of things would have to disappear, or suddenly get seriously roided out.

Also, there is a serious problem with this, in that at least 3 classes have to basically maximize their offense before they become really defensively capable.  It would turn the game into a warrior's playground, because only warriors (and extended subguild protectors) would be able to scale their defense up to cope with the critters they'd need to fight to scale their offense.  Alternatively, the only thing you could do is have a warrior tank for you while you swing away at something that would otherwise be melting your face.

[Jihelu]

"Practicing hitting something that is hard to hit makes me better at hitting things" makes a whole lot of intuitive sense, especially in the context of how every other skillup mechanic in the game works (except one, maybe, but I don't have an exact working knowledge of that).

I guess a workaround would be to re-jigger the stats and combat skills on critters such that new-butthole-tearing efficiency always scales with evasiveness (not necessarily vice-versa).  That way, every critter that could potentially give you a skillup at advanced or master level would also be able to seriously fuck you up.  That would be a pretty massive undertaking, though...a bunch of things would have to disappear, or suddenly get seriously roided out.

Also, there is a serious problem with this, in that at least 3 classes have to basically maximize their offense before they become really defensively capable.  It would turn the game into a warrior's playground, because only warriors (and extended subguild protectors) would be able to scale their defense up to cope with the critters they'd need to fight to scale their offense.  Alternatively, the only thing you could do is have a warrior tank for you while you swing away at something that would otherwise be melting your face.

SO what you are saying is you find party for a healer and dps so you can tank away at the level 30 deadmines raid?

[aeglaeca]

I'd just sort of like it if I didn't feel capped at journeyman with a many days played warrior.

[Jihelu]

I'd just sort of like it if I didn't feel capped at journeyman with a many days played warrior.

The differences between a 20 day warrior and a 50 day warrior is how fast you store.

[Clearsighted]

Alternatively, the only thing you could do is have a warrior tank for you while you swing away at something that would otherwise be melting your face.

It would certainly encourage indie hunters to join clans where they might find a warrior willing and able enough to protect them in battle.

[Molten Heart]

What if some mobiles had a large penalty if they weren't being engaged by a group or at least an equally formidable opponent

Alternatively, the only thing you could do is have a warrior tank for you while you swing away at something that would otherwise be melting your face.

It would certainly encourage indie hunters to join clans where they might find a warrior willing and able enough to protect them in battle.

Or encourage them to find an indie warrior to protect them in battle. I'm not sure if that's the goal, to encourage loners to group up, or to join clans.

[Narf]

I'd just sort of like it if I didn't feel capped at journeyman with a many days played warrior.

Ugh, this. Definitely this. I don't really care how it's done, it just feels like weapon skills were singled out for some reason to grind to a screeching halt.

[BadSkeelz]

Thirded. If I have one weakness of a player it's that I DO like watching my skills go up. Weapon and combat skills are just painful to get up (unless you're a vet with 200 characters and a firm grasp of the code).

[wizturbo]

Desire to see skills go up doesn't seem like a worthy reason to change anything.  Have more skill ranks might be an easy solution so people at least see some progress more often.  I dunno.", just doesn't seem like a thing to prioritize over other coding activities.

[bcw81]

Desire to see skills go up doesn't seem like a worthy reason to change anything.  Have more skill ranks might be an easy solution so people at least see some progress more often.  I dunno.", just doesn't seem like a thing to prioritize over other coding activities.

Didn't read anything except the last three posts, but it's more just that you have to do exceedingly stupid and unrealistic things to ever see your weapon skill ever crest above jman that it's kind of ridiculous. I think if they changed it so that sparring PC's automatically gave you a couple of points to your skills above what you'd get off say, fighting stilt-lizard #220 it would go a long way to fixing this.

[Riev]

At one point I had a pretty serious abuse of code, that got me to a master level in a weapon skill, AND almost Jman in a secondary skill. Of course, it was a pretty serious abuse of code so that had to stop and once that happened, I kind felt... eh.


I've branched on 3 warriors in over 10 years of playing, and none of them has killed a single PC.

[Eyeball]

I'd just sort of like it if I didn't feel capped at journeyman with a many days played warrior.

Same here.

[Clearsighted]

I would be fine with combat skills continuing to go up just as slowly, so long as you could do normal things and hunt normal things, and fight/spar against people normally, and still have incremental progress.

I'd rather have that, than be able to skill up by fighting a bunch've silly, weak, yet extremely fast critters.

I just wish characters that specialized in combat skills were given the same incentives to play normally as those that have magick abilities. There are many times where I wished I was attracted to playing magickers, because you can really just not care about coded advancement at all, and be assured that provided you RP realistically, and go about your life, you will eventually get there.

That can't be said for mundanes. It's not that mundanes slow down - they hit an absolute wall where further advancement is impossible without killing your soul.

Sure, you can RP normally. But most know how fun it is to play the Sergeant/soldier that spends all day RPing and actually being a professional who has fought many terrible and dangerous enemies, that gets plastered by the indie dwarf that just hunted verrin hawks instead.

[MeTekillot]

Maybe not being able to branch weapon skills practically is intended and that the only people who would have them (warriors in their 50s) is the way staff want it to be to signify old masters having to teach new students but being much less useful despite all their cool advanced wepons

[MeTekillot]

alternatively the code is spaghetti and they don't want to break everything trying to make it better

[The Silence of the Erdlus]

alternatively the code is spaghetti and they don't want to break everything trying to make it better