Armageddon General Discussion Board

Ok, so we're already seeing issues with trample, namely tag-team abuse of this to the point of paralyzing a target with the skill, even at low levels.  Please comment here with your thoughts and ideas on how to make this less abusable.

Right now the options we see are:

a) remove the post-delay for the victim
b) increase post-delay for the attacker
c) reduce chance of it working based on # of people attacking the victim
d) reduce chance if the victim isn't fighting you
e) all of the above
f) rip trample out

Make it impossible to trample someone who's fighting someone else.

There's not enough space for you to maneuver your mount in!

If the issue is with tag-teaming then I would go with a mixture of the options.

I don't know about removing the post delay although being knocked onto the ground is a rather large penalty in of itself.  Perhaps reducing the post-delay for the victim to a very short time frame.  If, let us use some random term of 'heartbeat,' the post-delay is currently five heartbeats I would think one or two at most would be more than enough.

I think the post-delay for the attacker should be significant, especially at low levels, and as the rider becomes more skilled it should be reduced.  The initial post-delay should be as long as whatever is the longest post-delay currently in the game.  If not a bit longer.

I think as more people are on a target then the chance for a successful trample should decrease.  Further, I think a failed trample should hit one random attacker.

I don't think that the chance should be reduced for a victim who isn't fighting you.  Actually, a caveat here, if the victim is already prone (sitting or resting or sleeping) then the trample should work normally.  If the victim is standing then I think the chance to trample should be reduced significantly.  After all, isn't charge supposed to be the opener?

A or B

"target not fighting you" means "the target is attacking someone else, while you are also fighting the target"

It doesn't mean "the target is just standing there fighting nobody."

If only the "tank" can use trample (which makes sense, since the "tank" is presumably the closest to the target, since the target is actively engaging the "tank"), it entirely prevents the tag-teaming problem.

Except for the case where the "tank" flees out while the target is still post-delayed, which allows a second person to take the "tank" position and initiate a second trample, I suppose.  But them would be some highly delicate tactics.

I voted B but was urging towards all of the above.

I would have definately voted for this, though:

Quote from: Synthesis on July 27, 2009, 08:54:26 PM
Make it impossible to trample someone who's fighting someone else.

There's not enough space for you to maneuver your mount in!

Quote from: lingering on July 27, 2009, 09:01:13 PMFurther, I think a failed trample should hit one random attacker.

I like this idea.

Quote from: Morgenes on July 27, 2009, 09:09:57 PM

Quote from: lingering on July 27, 2009, 09:01:13 PMFurther, I think a failed trample should hit one random attacker.

I like this idea.

Doesn't work if all attackers are mounted, which would be the problematic scenario in the first place.

Unless you can collide mounts and knock each other off.

Bumper kanks!

Quote from: Synthesis on July 27, 2009, 08:54:26 PM
Make it impossible to trample someone who's fighting someone else.

There's not enough space for you to maneuver your mount in!

I'd rather see your trample potentially affect anybody fighting the person you trampled. Rather than this stuff about 'impossible', which is a word I absolutely hate, it should be realistic, which means that you can run your animal into that fray, but the bigger it is, the more chance you'll bowl over your buddy too.

So, an erdlue would be the most accurate trampler, though its small size makes it less damaging. An inix would be horribly inaccurate, but its size makes it damaging.

Make trample like parry.  If you see the opportunity, you trample with your mount, but you don't necessarily get to create that opportunity.  So, a passive skill rather than one where you type in the command.  If the target is knocked down already by a charge, give a bonus to getting a trample in, possibly.

Synths first suggestion.

Only the tank can do it. It makes the most sense anyway. I mean really, mounted verses unmounted means they have to stay close enough together you could almost consider them the same target.

Quote from: Morgenes on July 27, 2009, 09:09:57 PM

Quote from: lingering on July 27, 2009, 09:01:13 PMFurther, I think a failed trample should hit one random attacker.

I like this idea.

Like? Like? Morgenes...if you implement this, I will personally feed you the brains of my next five PC's........ ;D

Quote from: Synthesis on July 27, 2009, 09:11:27 PM

Quote from: Morgenes on July 27, 2009, 09:09:57 PM

Quote from: lingering on July 27, 2009, 09:01:13 PMFurther, I think a failed trample should hit one random attacker.

I like this idea.

Doesn't work if all attackers are mounted, which would be the problematic scenario in the first place.

Unless you can collide mounts and knock each other off.

Bumper kanks!

That was kinda what I was thinking, chance to fall off.

I'm tempted to try to tame a carru now.

Also: potential problem with only making it "more difficult" to trample when there are multiple attackers.

You can trample, then disengage, which returns the number of attackers to one (the tank), then re-engage with another trample.

This basically means you would have to make the penalty very steep immediately for the first attacker after the tank, otherwise a group of three or more could still "tag-team" a target with trample.  The only difference would be that only one person (the tank) would be continually attacking.  The other two would be trampling and disengaging.

Again, this sounds like tactics...but if it keeps the target "locked," it's kind of lame.

Additional solution:  allow the 'draw,' 'drop,' 'rs,' 'rp,' 'es,' 'ep,' and 'sheathe' commands to be used while you're trample-locked.  This would prevent people from trampling an unarmed opponent and using that delay to prevent them from drawing weapons.

And the change hands command.

Don't stack the trample delay.  Multiple tramples still only keep the person down for X amount of time. Don't allow trample to be targeted i.e can only trample your main combat target.  People will have a chance to flee by stacking a stand and flee.

If you get knocked off your mount and have multiple riders working in tangent to keep you from doing anything, except, maybe, flee, is that really so bad?  Maybe a new room flag is needed to differentiate open and constricted riding rooms, but in open wilderness rooms anything short of an elf shouldn't be running away from a pair or more of highly trained riders (according to the helpfiles for charge and trample) who want to keep them around.

If you have friends you're not so helpless.  Rescue is powerful.  Don't travel alone or get caught by groups of hostile riders.

If there is a chance to knock allies off of their mounts with unsuccessful tramples, that should be completely nullified at higher skill levels.  That's just mickey mouse for highly trained riders.  What's the reasoning for that?
Better would be a failure message with delay stating you tried to get close enough but X got in your way. What highly trained rider is going to lose control of their mount so badly?

What's faster?  An elf or a running inix?
....................................running beetle?
....................................running erdlu?

What I'm really starting to wonder is:  how are people so good at trample already that this sort of abuse is obvious?  I haven't managed to get it to work a single time.

I've already made a couple of tweaks, some mentioned here, that went live with the latest reboot which will at least put a stop-gap preventing the gang-up issues I was seeing earlier.  I'm still listening/reading this and will take that feedback into account.

So far I've adjusted it so that the more people fighting the target, the harder it is too do.  If this penalty exceeds your skill, you can't manage to get in to trample.

Quote from: Marc on July 27, 2009, 10:14:41 PM
Better would be a failure message with delay stating you tried to get close enough but X got in your way. What highly trained rider is going to lose control of their mount so badly?

Just to address this.

The gold medal winner in dressage (the most difficult and most powerful form of controlled riding around) has had her horse spook / rear / injure himself at competition and during training while she was 'in control.'   Anky van Grunsven is the best dressage rider in the world and she loses control of her horse from time to time.  Very rarely yes but it happens.

In show jumping the best riders in the world regularly get refusals at jumps.  Sometimes their horse will rear up and run around wildly.  Other times the horse will simply leap to the side forcing the best riders in the world to fall off.

I find that a lot of Armageddon players have a belief that riding an animal is just like driving a motorized vehicle in that they will do everything you tell them to do every time so long as you are 'skilled.'  The reality plays out very differently as anyone who has even been around horses will attest to.

While the mounts in Armageddon are a wide variety of creatures the underlying fact is that they are living creatures and will react in undesired manners from time to time even by the best rider in the world.  But, think of it like this, you are trying to aim a multi-ton beast at a single prone target surrounded by other people... if you mess that up you're going to bump / crash / slam / rush into them.  Even if you do it properly you have a serious chance of bumping into those around the person.  

The larger your mount the more chance of bashing into someone I would think.

What kind of saves are there for the trample-ee? Very skilled rodeo riders for example, know exactly what to do when they fall under a horse or bull so they don't get hurt (more often then not).

Also, it would be assumed that a skilled and alert fighter who found themselves suddenly under a mount would have a chance for a direct strike at the mount's underside. Is there a way to implement that kind of thing if it's not already in place?

Quote from: Morgenes on July 27, 2009, 10:59:18 PM
I've already made a couple of tweaks, some mentioned here, that went live with the latest reboot which will at least put a stop-gap preventing the gang-up issues I was seeing earlier.  I'm still listening/reading this and will take that feedback into account.

So far I've adjusted it so that the more people fighting the target, the harder it is too do.  If this penalty exceeds your skill, you can't manage to get in to trample.

This sounds like a a good fix to the problem to me.

I haven't seen trample in action, and I haven't really been following the threads.

Is there now a way to forcefully dismount people that are trying to have you trampled?

Bash? I'm not sure really.

A skill to unseat a rider would be pretty cool though.

Quote from: Qzzrbl on July 27, 2009, 09:38:45 PM
I'm tempted to try to tame a carru now.

You have to name him Yakul. 8)

Haven't used the skill yet, but in theory, I think Synthesis' first suggestion would help.

Slightly off topic, but I'm all for weapons or skills that can unseat a rider...Bil hooks anyone?

Quote from: X-D on July 28, 2009, 05:04:23 AM
Slightly off topic, but I'm all for weapons or skills that can unseat a rider...Bil hooks anyone?

Sounds like a great added bonus for pike and polearm weapons.

It sounds like a cool idea to me too but, I think it would need to be quite well thought out in terms of code implementation so that it didn't completely destroy what meager combat bonuses mounted riders have only just now received.

Actually, I think that destroying those kinds of bonuses would be exactly what was intended.  With a specific type of weapon that a limited number of people can use.

Correct.

I love rangers and everything they get. But a ranger of equal time to a warrior should never be on equal footing with that warrior in melee, let alone have an advantage.

I guess the biggest problem I have with charge and trample is that they make no distinction between animal and humanoid. Animals should be easier to trample and charge, they really cannot plan ahead or think abstract.

Thinking beings on the other hand can. I mean really, avoiding a trample should be pretty easy by simply keeping to the side and a bit behind that giant 3 ton lizard.

And the fact that being mounted makes you immune to certain things and there is no way to unseat? Come on now.

Quote from: Synthesis on July 27, 2009, 09:11:27 PM

Quote from: Morgenes on July 27, 2009, 09:09:57 PM

Quote from: lingering on July 27, 2009, 09:01:13 PMFurther, I think a failed trample should hit one random attacker.

I like this idea.

Doesn't work if all attackers are mounted, which would be the problematic scenario in the first place.

Unless you can collide mounts and knock each other off.

Bumper kanks!

That is a pretty cool idea as well.

Quote from: X-D on July 28, 2009, 11:58:47 AMI love rangers and everything they get. But a ranger of equal time to a warrior should never be on equal footing with that warrior in melee, let alone have an advantage.

+1

What about making trample less paralyzing?  Keep the victim down for a while, but allow things like "draw" that give him half a fighting chance.

I thought that warriors already had a command that let them unseat a mounted character, but now that I think about it ... I'm thinking of carru ... and their way of doing said command is obviously different from a warrior's.

I think maybe a modification to bash to give it the ability to knock a mounted rider off their mount would be a good way to work it in perhaps, but I'd like the rider's skill taken into account as well.

And making it so long spear and halberd type two handed weapons could overcome that rider's combat bonuses and the standing person's penalties due to their reach would be nice also.

Quote from: musashi on July 28, 2009, 01:28:47 PM
I think maybe a modification to bash to give it the ability to knock a mounted rider off their mount would be a good way to work it in perhaps, but I'd like the rider's skill taken into account as well.

That makes sense, especially with an appropriate weapon, but it would remove one of the major advantages of fighting mounted.

Quote from: X-D on July 28, 2009, 11:58:47 AM
I love rangers and everything they get. But a ranger of equal time to a warrior should never be on equal footing with that warrior in melee, let alone have an advantage.

Quote from: Majikal on July 28, 2009, 05:48:13 PM

Quote from: X-D on July 28, 2009, 11:58:47 AM
I love rangers and everything they get. But a ranger of equal time to a warrior should never be on equal footing with that warrior in melee, let alone have an advantage.

I agree basically but ... I feel that a ranger should have more riding expertise than a warrior as well. So when we're talking about a mounted ranger vs. a warrior on foot I feel like the ranger should be able to get away with not being easily WTFpwned.

I don't know that I'd want them completely even in that circumstance, but at least a good 60/40, if that makes sense.

No, the ranger should be able to survive the warrior but should never be able to hold his own.  Warriors kick ass.  I'm actually VERY disappointed that rangers have as much mounted stuff as they do.  Let's see, they already have perception and stealth and archery and all the other skills they get.  Warriors get combat skills.  Rangers are already powerful enough.  A ranger shouldn't be able to get on a big mount at one day and kill a 20+ day combat-oriented character.  I've seen it happen.  (Before anyone responds to this, this change hopefully fixes that, but I haven't had any experience with it since.)  Rangers SHOULD be killing people with an arrow or three from maximum range before the victim ever gets close to the ranger.  A warrior should own everyone in the same room as them in a straight up fight.  Assassins should be killing everyone that doesn't see them coming.  That's how it works.  Don't change that balance.

Quote from: Synthesis on July 27, 2009, 08:54:26 PM
Make it impossible to trample someone who's fighting someone else.

There's not enough space for you to maneuver your mount in!

didn't go over the entire thread so not sure if this was said, but if someones locked in combat with another person and third person uses trample, have it have a chance to hit BOTH combatants imo.

Quote from: spawnloser on July 28, 2009, 06:03:21 PM
A warrior should own everyone in the same room as them in a straight up fight.

Absolutely, but being dismounted versus a skilled, mounted opponent should be a disadvantage.  Rangers, out of the box, come pretty close to having a useful level of skill on the riding side, but my feeling is that they lag warriors by about 10 days in terms of raw combat skill.  (Probably the gap widens as you get into Crazy Playtime Land.)

If you started a warrior and a ranger with similar stats at the same time and trained them equally, my guess is that the ranger might have a brief period of time (around day 5 or so?) in which he's able to own the warrior, because he's branched charge/trample and the warrior's either still getting thrown off in combat or is restricted to a single weapon.

That toe-to-toe advantage (if it works out that there is one) will disappear as soon as the warrior gets good enough at riding to fight mounted, with two weapons and without getting thrown.

Trust me, there ain't no ranger that can pwn a warrior of equal playing days (and training) in straight-up (no trickery) melee, as long as that warrior stays on his mount.

Better weapon skills + better parry + better shield use/dual wield/two handed + disarm = win.

QuoteBetter weapon skills + better parry + better shield use/dual wield/two handed + disarm = win.

Um...about half of that line is incorrect. Sorry, but since indepth code mechanics are not suppose to be talked about, that is all I can say on the matter. Other then, do to other mounted bonuses and negs the ranger of equal time would actually have a slight advantage...assuming the warrior stayed mounted.

Quote from: Synthesis on July 28, 2009, 08:36:33 PM
Trust me, there ain't no ranger that can pwn a warrior of equal playing days (and training) in straight-up (no trickery) melee, as long as that warrior stays on his mount.

Well... the part I don't like is..

Quote
as long as that warrior stays on his mount.

There are a few Warrior-guild skills that are completely useless when mounted. If you take a maximum-skill warrior vs a maximum-skill Ranger, -maybe- this suggestion is correct. However, as someone that -has- branched a weapon skill on a warrior-guild before, I can say that it takes way too much time to get to that point, and it has no guarantee that you are going to beat a Ranger while mounted.

Rangers are -built- to be sneaky, firing off arrows in the distance, sneaking in close and launching a surprise-attack on an unsuspecting enemy that is -already- engaged. They are built for ranged combat, and now are built for mounted melee combat. This means the only place a Warrior has the -real- edge in combat (all things considered relatively equal) against Rangers is indoors.



Topic-related: I have no problem with skills like trample and charge. I really don't. I have confidence that things will be balanced soon enough, but I am still for the ability for someone to knock the rider off a mount. If you attack the horse someone is riding on, it will often throw the rider, but in Arm, the mount then attacks you and you get all -kinds- of negatives to your skill for it. Perhaps things like "kick" and "bash" when applied to a mount should have a chance checked by combat skill(by that I mean kick and bash) versus riding skill to dismount the other combatant, -without- engaging the mount in combat?

I imagine it could be rather difficult...

Morg, it might be helpfil to get a post in Staff Announcements explaining everything the new skills do (and any changes to charge) as well as a brief explanation of what makes them different. There are a few details the trample helpfile seems to not have, such as the fact that you have to be actively engaged in combat to use the skill. I think that'd be a big help to people who didn't read both threads and/or people new to the game.

Other than that, the new skill seems fine to me.

Quote from: Majikal on July 28, 2009, 05:48:13 PM

Quote from: X-D on July 28, 2009, 11:58:47 AM
I love rangers and everything they get. But a ranger of equal time to a warrior should never be on equal footing with that warrior in melee, let alone have an advantage.

I also wanted to say that I'm all for there being a chance of trampling or unmounting the opponents of the trample target on a failure.

I agree with all of the Above BUT Post Delay for Victim. Keep that in.

Quote from: Krath on July 30, 2009, 09:27:25 AM
I agree with all of the Above BUT Post Delay for Victim. Keep that in.

+1, I think the above suggestions provide more than enough cons to the skill without needing to throw that one in there on top.

All of the above, but *reduce* the post-delay for the victim. I wouldn't want to see it removed entirely - if you're a victim of a trample, it -should- take you a second or two to regain your senses/balance/attention span/whatever else you lose when you get trampled or when someone -almost- tramples you. A moment's shock, whether the attacker succeeds or fails..seems reasonable.

Quote from: Lizzie on July 30, 2009, 10:03:08 AM
All of the above, but *reduce* the post-delay for the victim. I wouldn't want to see it removed entirely - if you're a victim of a trample, it -should- take you a second or two to regain your senses/balance/attention span/whatever else you lose when you get trampled or when someone -almost- tramples you. A moment's shock, whether the attacker succeeds or fails..seems reasonable.

Holy Shit....We agreed! :o

Idea: Mounts unable or less capable of trampling when fatigued by varying degrees.  Chance to injure mount (health) or break limbs (unable to move) while trampling.

Quote from: Sephiroto on July 31, 2009, 04:41:54 PM
Idea: Mounts unable or less capable of trampling when fatigued by varying degrees.  Chance to injure mount (health) or break limbs (unable to move) while trampling.

Aweseome, awesome, and more awesome.

Quote from: Sephiroto on July 31, 2009, 04:41:54 PM
Idea: Mounts unable or less capable of trampling when fatigued by varying degrees.  Chance to injure mount (health) or break limbs (unable to move) while trampling.

Nooooo, such a bad idea.....

Quote from: tortall on July 31, 2009, 07:18:03 PM

Quote from: Sephiroto on July 31, 2009, 04:41:54 PM
Idea: Mounts unable or less capable of trampling when fatigued by varying degrees.  Chance to injure mount (health) or break limbs (unable to move) while trampling.

Nooooo, such a bad idea.....

Why?

Has anyone else noticed that stunned opponents can regularly evade trample.
I bugged it just in case it's not working as intended.

Heh, I was going to offer as a suggestion ... makng trample possible to do ... at least once out of 100 times?

My skill with it must suck  :-\

Quote from: tortall on July 31, 2009, 07:18:03 PM

Quote from: Sephiroto on July 31, 2009, 04:41:54 PM
Idea: Mounts unable or less capable of trampling when fatigued by varying degrees.  Chance to injure mount (health) or break limbs (unable to move) while trampling.

Nooooo, such a bad idea.....

Injure mount I like, breaking a limb not as much. While trampling should be deangerous to the mount, having an unable to move mount in a fight in the middle of the desert could very well be a death sentance. I would be okay with it if it had a very low percent change to happen, or only happened in extreme failure. Again, injuring a mount in the trample for health I think is great.

Quote from: Taven on August 02, 2009, 10:44:16 AM

Quote from: tortall on July 31, 2009, 07:18:03 PM

Quote from: Sephiroto on July 31, 2009, 04:41:54 PM
Idea: Mounts unable or less capable of trampling when fatigued by varying degrees.  Chance to injure mount (health) or break limbs (unable to move) while trampling.

Nooooo, such a bad idea.....

Injure mount I like, breaking a limb not as much. While trampling should be deangerous to the mount, having an unable to move mount in a fight in the middle of the desert could very well be a death sentance. I would be okay with it if it had a very low percent change to happen, or only happened in extreme failure. Again, injuring a mount in the trample for health I think is great.

I can handle mount being injured. Breaking limbs.... I'd rather just get RID of trample than break limbs. I can't get it to work anyways. I'm assuming everyone who got the skill started at 0 or something? Because I'm pretty sure my ride is maxed, and I always fail with trample.

I'm pretty sure my ride skill isn't maxed, but none the less ... I've never actually succeded in trampling anything yet either, even agaist already prone things.

Quote from: musashi on August 02, 2009, 02:19:37 PM
I'm pretty sure my ride skill isn't maxed, but none the less ... I've never actually succeded in trampling anything yet either, even agaist already prone things.

same here, I haven't fell off my mount fighting in several several days now, and -still- have yet to trample something even if its stunned on the ground OR led with a successful charge.

don't know though, will keep trying

I bugged it IG, now that I know other people are having the same experience. Just in case.

I haven't used trample at all, and I haven't charged in at least a year, so I'm not going to add feedback to those skills specifically...

However, feeding off of something Morgenes said about mounted combat not being fleshed out enough for use as a real combat style in arm1, I think maybe some more additions could balance the issue and test some ideas for arm2.

Attacks on mounts for one. If I'm fighting a mounted enemy I can't do any damage to the mount itself unless I initiate combat, which unless I'm mistaken, I can't do without first fleeing (I'm not sure if I can do it by disengaging and then attacking a new target - can you do that when a first opponent is already attacking you?).  Even if I can, I face the new problem of fighting the attacker -and- the mount, suffering penalties and probably still being prone to charges and tramples, even though the "reality" of being charged by a giant lizard or insect is that they're already a part of the fight before codedly involving their own attacks. So under few circumstances will I attempt to put my spear into that war beetle to cripple my mounted enemy.

Perhaps treating a mount and his rider as one combatant makes more sense. In one version of this idea random attacks target the mount, but this presents the problem of mounted fighters having an enormous hp buffer in addition to their other current advantages. With that in place heavier defensive penalties would be called for, not lighter ones. In the second version, the mount actually has a chance of taking damage from the code, separate from enemy attacks, reflecting all the weapons swinging, bodies crashing, and the sheer risk involved in getting an animal with a person on its back involved in combat.

Additionally, treating them both as one combatant would mean the mount takes on a more gear-like role, granting bonuses or penalties to the rider's actions based on its ability as a war mount. Throw in saddles, barding, and other 'packab'le' goodies and having a mount that won't break its legs frrom the force of being involved in a heavy fight becomes an expensive but worthwhile investment.

Quote from: House Rising Sun on August 02, 2009, 07:27:20 PM
Additionally, treating them both as one combatant would mean the mount takes on a more gear-like role, granting bonuses or penalties to the rider's actions based on its ability as a war mount. Throw in saddles, barding, and other 'packab'le' goodies and having a mount that won't break its legs frrom the force of being involved in a heavy fight becomes an expensive but worthwhile investment.

My favorite part about that idea is that narrowing down to the best warmount for -you- would have real benefits and drawbacks. It wouldn't just be a "well, this mount has kind of low stamina, so there's no way I'll take it out" thing anymore.

I can't help but feel like before we go down the road of "standing fighters should be able to hamstring the mounts of mounted fighters" we should also work out how "mounted fighters should be able to easily maneuver around standing fighters because they're riding an animal and unless they're fighting a desert elf odds are the humanoid is not going to be able to chase after them unless they're also on a mount".

I think the main reason mounts were employed in history as aids of war in the first place is because of their mobility, not their ability to kick people or in some way be "an extra attack". That aspect of fighting seems to be missing almost entirely in Arm due to the limitations of the combat engine.

Folks on a mount have a better chance of getting away while fleeing because they won't run out of stamina, but calavary was usually used by charging at the opposing force, taking swings in passing, getting quickly out of range, and then turning around to do it again or moving onto another target.

I'd like to see those abilities somehow introduced before we start coding how to lame the animals.

In an aside: It is awesome now how a charging animal's "bash" takes your PC's mount's size into effect when it tries. I saw a certain big creature try to bash someone riding a bigger creature, and the would be basher ended up sprawled on the ground. Very nice ... because I always found it a bit silly that carru and the like could jump up higher than a war beetle to bash you off of it, and into the next room somehow.

I find it funny that animals barely a cord off the ground can jump up and hit you in the head.

That being said, Trample does not work for me. I've hit every single attempted charge, but zero tramples.

> Nosave trample off

I know. That has to be a bug.

Quote from: Xagon on August 05, 2009, 09:29:53 AM
I find it funny that animals barely a cord off the ground can jump up and hit you in the head.

That being said, Trample does not work for me. I've hit every single attempted charge, but zero tramples.

> Nosave trample off

Well since attempting since it was put in I -still- haven't successfully landed one even on near-death stunned critters.
damn the super spasms of evasion3

Morgenes??? Can we fixes it? Pleeeease?  :'(

Somehow I think that those of you that have the skill but are unable to be successful simply have low skill or skill caps.

I've seen many PCs being very successful with the skill. To the point that I think it is still a bit too powerful.

I could do it when it FIRST came in ... then after the second reboot when (I think) Morgenes wanted to tone it down ... it hasn't worked since. Are you talking about after the second reboot X-D?

Quote from: X-D on August 05, 2009, 01:53:07 PM
Somehow I think that those of you that have the skill but are unable to be successful simply have low skill or skill caps.

I've seen many PCs being very successful with the skill. To the point that I think it is still a bit too powerful.

Maybe my ride skill isn't high enough but i -never- fight unmounted, and always wield two weapons, or shoot mounted, not sure how to increase my ride skill more.
last time I fell off of my mount was probably RL week ago -maybe- don't recall

Quote from: shadeoux on August 05, 2009, 02:23:37 PM
Maybe my ride skill isn't high enough but i -never- fight unmounted, and always wield two weapons, or shoot mounted, not sure how to increase my ride skill more.
last time I fell off of my mount was probably RL week ago -maybe- don't recall

If you fell off that recently, you're prob'ly not maxed.

Mmm, wasn't trample supposed to be for all highly skilled riders, not just Rangers?  Of course, I can only think of one other guild that would obviously fall into that definition.

Not knowing y'all's experiences with trample all I can say is...I've seen it working. I've personally been trampled several times. Let's stop trying to trample me. Thanks.  ;D

Quote from: Taven on August 02, 2009, 10:44:16 AM

Quote from: tortall on July 31, 2009, 07:18:03 PM

Quote from: Sephiroto on July 31, 2009, 04:41:54 PM
Idea: Mounts unable or less capable of trampling when fatigued by varying degrees.  Chance to injure mount (health) or break limbs (unable to move) while trampling.

Nooooo, such a bad idea.....

Injure mount I like, breaking a limb not as much. While trampling should be deangerous to the mount, having an unable to move mount in a fight in the middle of the desert could very well be a death sentance. I would be okay with it if it had a very low percent change to happen, or only happened in extreme failure. Again, injuring a mount in the trample for health I think is great.

That's the point.  Don't want to break your mount's legs, then don't trample over shit.  It goes with the territory.

Quote from: Sephiroto on August 05, 2009, 03:45:13 PM
That's the point.  Don't want to break your mount's legs, then don't trample over shit.  It goes with the territory.

Injuring a leg I could see. Making it harder to move, injuring a leg or other parts, yes. Breaking a leg? That pretty much gurentees that you'd have to kill the mount, or put it down. Unless there's a Vividuian involved, I think the mount is a goner. I'm not against mount injury, but breaking a leg should be a real thing, codedly speaking. If everytime a PC went into battle, and had a chance of breaking an arm or a leg, codedly, wouldn't that really change things? I'm not saying that mounts shouldn't break legs, but I think that injury in terms of HP or STUN is probably better for the game, unless it's a massive failure in the attempt.

Making moving an injured mount could cause it to loose more HP, with an increasing risk to it, if you have to flee. There could be other "sliding" penalties, but it seems like a failure resulting in instant worthlessness of the mount and potential stranding in the middle of hostile territory would make no one use trample, ever.

Quote from: Taven on August 05, 2009, 08:43:23 PM

Quote from: Sephiroto on August 05, 2009, 03:45:13 PM
That's the point.  Don't want to break your mount's legs, then don't trample over shit.  It goes with the territory.

Injuring a leg I could see. Making it harder to move, injuring a leg or other parts, yes. Breaking a leg? That pretty much gurentees that you'd have to kill the mount, or put it down. Unless there's a Vividuian involved, I think the mount is a goner. I'm not against mount injury, but breaking a leg should be a real thing, codedly speaking. If everytime a PC went into battle, and had a chance of breaking an arm or a leg, codedly, wouldn't that really change things? I'm not saying that mounts shouldn't break legs, but I think that injury in terms of HP or STUN is probably better for the game, unless it's a massive failure in the attempt.

Making moving an injured mount could cause it to loose more HP, with an increasing risk to it, if you have to flee. There could be other "sliding" penalties, but it seems like a failure resulting in instant worthlessness of the mount and potential stranding in the middle of hostile territory would make no one use trample, ever.

I guess I'm ok with the idea of the mount breaking its leg on a failed attempt, but lets be fair ... and make it so that a failed bash attempt dislocates the shoulder and forces the person in question to drop their weapons and not be able to wield them again until they're all fixed up. That's the point right? Don't want to dislocate your shoulder? Don't bash shit. It goes with the territory.

I don't want to see mounts hurt themselves every failed or successful attempt.  I'd like to see it at a percentage similar to falling on your neck when failing a climb check.  Its a risk you take, you know, to balance things out.

Quote from: Sephiroto on August 11, 2009, 01:35:00 PM
I don't want to see mounts hurt themselves every failed or successful attempt.  I'd like to see it at a percentage similar to falling on your neck when failing a climb check.  Its a risk you take, you know, to balance things out.

say (raising an eyebrow) Indeed.

Isn't there already a risk of landing on your neck and passing out when a mount bucks you? I seem to remember that in the helpfiles.

Quote from: musashi on August 11, 2009, 02:57:44 PM
Isn't there already a risk of landing on your neck and passing out when a mount bucks you? I seem to remember that in the helpfiles.

The only way you'll pass out is if your stun is already so low that the stun damage from the fall puts you < 0.  As far as I know, there's no "you landed on your neck!" instant loss of 80+ stun.

Quote from: Synthesis on August 13, 2009, 02:24:14 PM
As far as I know, there's no "you landed on your neck!" instant loss of 80+ stun.

There may be a "you landed on your neck!" instant loss of life.  But I heard it from an NPC, and you know how they are.

Quote from: Synthesis on August 13, 2009, 02:24:14 PM

Quote from: musashi on August 11, 2009, 02:57:44 PM
Isn't there already a risk of landing on your neck and passing out when a mount bucks you? I seem to remember that in the helpfiles.

The only way you'll pass out is if your stun is already so low that the stun damage from the fall puts you < 0.  As far as I know, there's no "you landed on your neck!" instant loss of 80+ stun.

But it is in there right? Being bucked from your mount taking down your stun? It makes since to me for the stun loss to be significantly less than what you would suffer for failing a climb check.

Falling off a bettle < falling off the shield wall.

Wait, isn't Charge the same thing?

This makes me want an elven equalizer.

Quote from: Versu on August 26, 2009, 11:51:01 AM
Wait, isn't Charge the same thing?

This makes me want an elven equalizer.

> hide

If this stops charge from being abused I'm down. At first it sounded like a new uber attack. Now it sounds like charge has been broken into 2 skills.

Elves should get racial backstab. Yay great idea!

Elves get 'I don't have to rely on this stupid mount'.

I don't know if it's just me, but I have yet to successfully trample anything... ever. I use the skill fairly often and have a goodly amount of time played on my character.

Has anyone else experienced this?

Quote from: Spice Spice Baby on August 27, 2009, 12:29:03 AM
I don't know if it's just me, but I have yet to successfully trample anything... ever. I use the skill fairly often and have a goodly amount of time played on my character.

Has anyone else experienced this?

Yes, and not just you and I. I actually emailed the staff about it recently. My character has never been able to trample anything either, even if said animal was already stunned or nearly dieing on the ground. They still dodge it.

Yeah, I've never managed to actually trample anything while it wasn't critically wounded.

I think I did it a few times vs. something that was mortally wounded, but it had so little effect I did it three times and the critter was still alive.

Quote from: Versu on August 26, 2009, 11:51:01 AM
Wait, isn't Charge the same thing?

This makes me want an elven equalizer.

Hah. Considering desert elves can out run and out maneuver, easily, a war beetle...A skilled desert elf is almost impossible to take down without several very successful charges. I don't know how trample factors into it, as I haven't played more than an hour or two in the last few months. But I do remember dealing with desert elf and their magic legs bullshit. I would have preferred to saddle up one of them than a beetle.

Quote from: Spice Spice Baby on August 27, 2009, 12:29:03 AM
I don't know if it's just me, but I have yet to successfully trample anything... ever. I use the skill fairly often and have a goodly amount of time played on my character.

Has anyone else experienced this?

Same here. Never had a success.

Quote from: netflix on August 31, 2009, 03:09:38 PM

Quote from: Spice Spice Baby on August 27, 2009, 12:29:03 AM
I don't know if it's just me, but I have yet to successfully trample anything... ever. I use the skill fairly often and have a goodly amount of time played on my character.

Has anyone else experienced this?

Same here. Never had a success.

I'm told there will be a bug fix soon to correct this. Yay Morgenes!

Quote from: musashi on August 31, 2009, 08:58:55 PM
I'm told there will be a bug fix soon to correct this. Yay Morgenes!

Has there beeb anymore word on this?

Not yet, I'm still waiting.

I think the crash had something to do with the Charge / Trample code. All of a sudden, I'm failing charges and succeeding with trampling.
It sucks that I can't spam-charge that mekillot anymore, but at least I can trample everyone else!

Quote from: Xagon on September 07, 2009, 04:44:28 PM
I think the crash had something to do with the Charge / Trample code. All of a sudden, I'm failing charges and succeeding with trampling.
It sucks that I can't spam-charge that mekillot anymore, but at least I can trample everyone else!

Charging mekillots was the best thing ever.

I've had a few days played to mess around with trample.

1) I think people, especially warriors, should get a higher skill cap with it. There is reference in the docs to heavy cavalry regiments of war beetles...Well. Let's give some mounts bonuses to trampling, and make the max for it a bit higher for warriors, to do that heavy cavalry goodness.

2) Increase the before - after timer, since if the skill is more reliable, it should have a corresponding increase in time before and after using it.

Right now, it seems to function like a mounted kick. Just a bit less useful.

/That said, I adore the fact that it was even added at all...

What I would've preferred, is to have some kind of special animal, a version of Inix and a version of Beetle that is designed for trampling/charging. It would not be as quick or as vigorous as regular mounts, be significantly expensive, but give a sizable bonus to charge and trample. Something to allow the concept of "heavy cavalry" come true, and yet not allow every two bit ranger/warrior to be a one man heavy cavalry unit.

Something that offers a bonus significant enough to make it worth the negatives to ride on when you're going out to war. But have enough negatives in it, to make the casual travel use unwise.

-War-beetle?

Less sarcasm: If I remember correctly, compared to your average grey kank, a war beetle was just about what you described.

Quote from: FantasyWriter on September 15, 2009, 05:54:21 PM
-War-beetle?

Less sarcasm: If I remember correctly, compared to your average grey kank, a war beetle was just about what you described.

Heh. Yeah, this.

A war beetle fits the bill exactly. They move about as fast as you can walk, too. The only reason war beetles are so common now, is because they became the next most useful mount for long range journeys after kanks died off, and are cheaper than inix.

I wouldn't mind if trampling/charging took some stamina from the mount, (and a war beetle would be admirably suited to soak it up), if the skill cap on trampling was raised to the point where it was more consistent.

Trampling doesn't even need to be made more powerful. Just raise the skill cap for it.

Quote from: FantasyWriter on September 15, 2009, 05:54:21 PM
-War-beetle?

Less sarcasm: If I remember correctly, compared to your average grey kank, a war beetle was just about what you described.

... A war beetle is "one" of the best 'casual use' mounts. It might've been 'ment' to be what I described, but ... it isnt.


To add to the list of qualities Clearsighted mentioned, they also have .. bzzzt IC info. But yeah ... definately one of the best long range mounts. Them and Inix are about sharing the first step, with various qualities (speed, endurance, packing) varying.

I've had people who've done long range grebbing prefer Beetles over Inix, even if they costed twice as much as Inix do.

Quote from: FantasyWriter on September 15, 2009, 05:54:21 PM
-War-beetle?

Less sarcasm: If I remember correctly, compared to your average grey kank, a war beetle was just about what you described.

Your average grey kank is dead, though.

I'm just glad trample actually functions now at all, instead of it always failing like it did the first month or so of it being in game.

That said I think it's finethe way it works currently. It seems to me like the person being trampled has more than enough chance to avoid it; if I'm reading the coded echoes right I've seen it get avoided outright, and I've also seen my PC's mount successfully pull off the trample, only to have the victim pull off a saving throw and "get out from under it" at the last moment. Also, it seems you can't trample things of a certain size, and you also can't trample things if lots of other folks are already fighting it.

I think we have a pretty healthy list of limitations for the skill already.

Quote from: musashi on September 15, 2009, 07:01:18 PM
I'm just glad trample actually functions now at all, instead of it always failing like it did the first month or so of it being in game.

That said I think it's finethe way it works currently. It seems to me like the person being trampled has more than enough chance to avoid it; if I'm reading the coded echoes right I've seen it get avoided outright, and I've also seen my PC's mount successfully pull off the trample, only to have the victim pull off a saving throw and "get out from under it" at the last moment. Also, it seems you can't trample things of a certain size, and you also can't trample things if lots of other folks are already fighting it.

I think we have a pretty healthy list of limitations for the skill already.

How would you feel about raising the skill cap on it, Musahi? At least for a class like warrior or such. Or maybe tying it with 'ride'. (I.E, whatever level of skill your guild/subguild allows, trample should equal it.)

I ... dunno. Honestly.

I mean, mounted combat has been given a LOT of love recently and to be honest, I'm pretty content with it the way things are now. I have noticed that my PC can, for example, completely OWN a certain type of critter while mounted, but have his ass royally kicked by the same critter if caught on his own two feet. Mind you, I'm playing a ranger, not a warrior, but my point is that I think mounted combat has been given a lot of cool bonuses to counteract the fact that charging can only be done pre-combat now. I feel like at the moment, the pro's and con's are about balanced out.

Has anyone even reached the max of the skill to even 'discuss' the cap?

Quote from: musashi on September 15, 2009, 07:28:41 PM
I ... dunno. Honestly.

I mean, mounted combat has been given a LOT of love recently and to be honest, I'm pretty content with it the way things are now. I have noticed that my PC can, for example, completely OWN a certain type of critter while mounted, but have his ass royally kicked by the same critter if caught on his own two feet. Mind you, I'm playing a ranger, not a warrior, but my point is that I think mounted combat has been given a lot of cool bonuses to counteract the fact that charging can only be done pre-combat now. I feel like at the moment, the pro's and con's are about balanced out.

I definitely love the changes to mounted combat as well.

Quote from: Dar on September 15, 2009, 07:48:50 PM
Has anyone even reached the max of the skill to even 'discuss' the cap?

I'm sure that many have. It's not hard to acquire.

I still haven't pulled off a successful trample against anything that wasn't mortally wounded already.

Quote from: Synthesis on September 15, 2009, 10:55:53 PM
I still haven't pulled off a successful trample against anything that wasn't mortally wounded already.

QQ more!




....
.......

I'm just kidding man. I know your pain, it happened with my guy for the longest damn time but then, FINALLY, he started being able to do it. It's still only every once in awhile, like 3 times out of 10, but I did notice that slowly but surely he was getting better.

Quote from: Clearsighted on September 15, 2009, 08:14:18 PM
I'm sure that many have. It's not hard to acquire.

Aquire yes. But Trample is an actual 'skill' right? Meaning ... you improve it aswell. So the question was has anyone "reached" the current cap yet, to make the discussion of "raising" it feasable?

I guess only staff can answer that.

I'd have to say, realistically, that it's been in long enough for someone to max it, but that it's not been working long enough to have solid results that could validate any argument with empirical evidence, yet.

I've still yet to get a successful trample, and I have a 30 day ranger who HAD max charge before. Now charge almost never works either. Neither ever work for me.

Why did trample start out at 0 for those of us that already had characters who've already coded maxed it? Can we email the imms about fixing this?

for the record, I've seen lots of successful tramples, even early on the skill.

If yours is not working...I'd definitly talk to staff on the matter.

Quote from: X-D on September 16, 2009, 09:16:02 PM
for the record, I've seen lots of successful tramples, even early on the skill.

If yours is not working...I'd definitly talk to staff on the matter.

This. I mailed ... now mine works fine.

Quote from: tortall on September 16, 2009, 09:06:18 PM
I've still yet to get a successful trample, and I have a 30 day ranger who HAD max charge before. Now charge almost never works either. Neither ever work for me.

Why did trample start out at 0 for those of us that already had characters who've already coded maxed it? Can we email the imms about fixing this?

Funny, I never had this problem on my Delf-assassin-caravan guide

Trample's skill is capped based on your attributes, not your guild.  So if you think your trample skill is maxed and isn't high enough, it's likely you aren't (smart/fast/strong/endurant) enough [yes I'm intentionally being oblique about which stat it's based off of].

All of my dude's stats are above average, and I still suck at it?

Quote from: Synthesis on September 25, 2009, 10:52:06 PM
All of my dude's stats are above average, and I still suck at it?

send me your account name and character name and a log of you sucking at it and I will investigate.

Stats don't matter!

oh, right....

Quote from: Marc on September 26, 2009, 12:19:44 AM
Stats don't matter!

oh, right....

(http://www.collider.com/uploads/imageGallery/Men_in_Black/men_in_black_movie_image_tommy_lee_jones_and_will_smith.jpg)

Ahem, now then. Stats don't matter.