PDA

View Full Version : Saber system suggestions


Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

JRHockney*
01-05-2006, 09:32 PM
I was going to wait until I could retrieve my old ideas from the MB site, but I just realized that my ideas have changed with my new found understanding of the new system.

First off, great job on the saber throw, changing red style to unlimited chaining (now its actually fun to use!), and making fakes much easier. I will say that the styles still do not move at the same speed though (red and purple still have a longer wined up), which is fine as long as the slower styles have some kind of advantage over the quicker (such as bigger reach, power, or greater defense).

The way I picture this saber system achieving ultimate greatness is by increasing the time at which saber "volleying" takes place without stuns, knockdowns, and disarms (which still seem to happen too often, sadly). I've found ways of getting into volleys with TABBOTS and they look spectacular and are intense!! This volleying usually happens when I hold down attack and attack in different directions as the TABBOT does the same thing and it takes at least a second or two of saber collisons before one of use gets stunned, knocked down, or disarmed.

In order to increase saber volleying I have a few suggestions:

1. prohibit stuns until after the opponents dodge/block meter is below the halfway point. Since the dodge meter all ready works as a block meter, this should make for some great volleys.

2. prohibit disarms and knockdowns until the force point meter is below 40 or 50. This is more realistic because a real jedi wouldn't lose their saber or get knocked down at full strength. It would also be a good indicator of what the opponent is low on (dodge or fp meter wise) and increase general volleying.

3. While both fighter's meters are high, what use to stun, knockdown, or disarm will now only lower the reciever's dodge meter until it is past the half way point. The person who has attacked or defended correctly will not lose any dodge points for his action. I hope this explains the logic of the upper two suggestions sufficiently.

4. I think it would also be cool to promote defending with an attack (a.k.a. swing blocking) by lowering the dodge points lost in moving the wrong way in defending or attacking (that would normally get you stunned, disarmed, or knocked down in this system) if that person is also in the middle of a swing. The only problem with this, is that it puts slower styles at a disadvantage so I would suggest uping their defense or power.

I remember from our MB converation that you made the stuns primarly to deal with noobs, which was a good idea but they just happen too often. Under my suggestions, a noob would still get destoryed by anyone who knows what their doing, but not before the noob witnesses the spectacular potential of volleying and other mechanics of this system in general (and thus, make him want to really learn it well)

I also would suggest bringing back katas (wait!!!!! he me out!!! LOL) but they will disarm the user unless the defender has less than 25 fp. Thus, they would be only used as finishing moves!!! :duel:

I also think that one of the saber styles should be balanced for usage only for fight two or more people. I don't know how this would be done, but I'm sure you could think of some way.

Lastly, in order for these suggestions to work, the fp gain would have to anyways be at deflaut or higher, otherwise players will run out of fp too quickly.

Hopefully you will find these suggestions more in tuned with you saber system. I look forward to your comments. :ears1:

By the way Razor, you mentioned you were self taught at all this coding stuff. How did you go about doing that?

razorace
01-06-2006, 06:30 PM
hmmmm, I'm starting to like your suggestions about the volleying. However, I'm a bit worried about how the attacker's DP will be drained in this situation. It seems to me that attacker DP should be drained from successfully parrying on the defender's part. However, it's going to be tricky to balance the DP drain enough to make defending/attacking balanced.

Along those lines, I don't really think that "swing blocking" will work for two reasons. First off, the action is too fast for players to be able to fully handle, this is the same reason why manual blocking wasn't much of a success. Secondly, I'm not really sure there's a way to differ between a normal attack and a "swing block". Again, we don't want to overpower the attackers vs the defenders.

As for katas, you make a good arguement, but I was kind of hoping to come up with something different for the use of the attack + altattack button combo. Maybe additional melee strikes or special finishing moves.

Finally, as for self-teaching, I did take several coding classes before getting into modding, but I had to learn all about modding myself. It's really just a matter of understanding the basics of coding, and then just diving into the code. :)

JRHockney*
01-06-2006, 08:54 PM
hmmmm, I'm starting to like your suggestions about the volleying. However, I'm a bit worried about how the attacker's DP will be drained in this situation. It seems to me that attacker DP should be drained from successfully parrying on the defender's part. However, it's going to be tricky to balance the DP drain enough to make defending/attacking balanced.

I'm glad you like the suggestion, but I see how it might be difficult to balance. Although I still think its worth a shot for the sake of theatrics and realism of the system.

I agree that the attackers DP should be drained from being successfully parried, but the defender should still lose DP if he does not parry the attack in the right direction. A successful attack or defense should cause the same amount of DP loss.

One way to make the it more obvious (and perhaps balanced) as to who successfully attacked and defended (without stopping the action) would be to put a 1/4 second delay in the losers drawback of his block or attack. The loser who pause in what ever way you decide and only be able to block in that pause without being able to attack.

For example: if and attacker gets parried by a defender, the attackers saber would either freeze where it was parried or pull back in slow motion for 1/4-1/3 of a second and for that short time period the attacker wouldn't be able to swing again. This may give the defender just enough time to start to start his attack first before the former attacker can start his again. It would be just like a Micro-stun without really stopping the action! On the other hand, a defender who unsuccessfully parried an attack (moved in the wrong direction) would be would also pause and be unable to attack for that 1/4-1/3 second. The pause should only be long enough person who successfully parried or attacked to start the next swing first.

Along those lines, I don't really think that "swing blocking" will work for two reasons. First off, the action is too fast for players to be able to fully handle, this is the same reason why manual blocking wasn't much of a success. Secondly, I'm not really sure there's a way to differ between a normal attack and a "swing block". Again, we don't want to overpower the attackers vs the defenders.

Your right. However, I wouldn't give up on swing blocking too easily (it did work in MB {even though their system is different}). I noticed that parrying can still take place even while I'm swing today when I was fighting TABBOTs (I dont know, maybe it was a bug).

I just thought of a way to include swing blocking and distinguish between attacking and defending while using it. First, Make it so that two people attacking eachother (or holding down attack) at the same time don't lose any DP and all the attacks are auto blocked with the swings.

While the sabers are both attacking, in order to successfully parry while swinging, one of the saberists will press ALT ATTACK and the correct parry direction (to the attackers swing) to become the defender and make the attacker pause and lose DP.

If a saberist presses the press ALT attack while swinging and moves in the wrong to the attackers swing, that saberist will get paused and lose DP. The DP penalties for this type of parrying or miss parrying should be less than the regular way (the way I listed for the first quote).

In this fashion, the "fake" button also becomes a parry button in a swing. It would probably make doing regular fakes a little more dangerous, but their dangerous to do in real life too more or less. The point of these ideas is to teach the player to watch the other players saber even in an intense volley. It might seem fast at first, but I think the good player will start to use the "swing block/parrying" more often once they get use to it because it looks cooler and saves their DP from going down too quickly.

I'm sure this would be a pain to code, but it would create the kind of cinematic "volleys" we've been talking about and make it really fun to watch.

As for katas, you make a good arguement, but I was kind of hoping to come up with something different for the use of the attack + altattack button combo. Maybe additional melee strikes or special finishing moves.

Good idea. I won't miss them anyway! LOL! Although the saber trailing in them effect might be useful for eventually creating slower power swings of some kind, but your guess is as good as mine as to how that could be done and balanced.

Finally, as for self-teaching, I did take several coding classes before getting into modding, but I had to learn all about modding myself. It's really just a matter of understanding the basics of coding, and then just diving into the code.

Wow. Hmm, just Knowing the basics, huh. Do you think I could learn it from a web tutorial or reading C for Dummies! lol. :laugh6: Thats probably the only way I'll learn! Any suggestions on a good tutorial website or websites?

razorace
01-11-2006, 03:24 AM
Sorry, I guess I forgot to respond to this thread. :)

Anyway, as for swing parrying, I see two problems:
1. Since the player is controlling the direction of attack, he's going to know which way he'd need to move to be able to move into an attack. In addition, pure saber-on-saber impacts have a bit more irradic impact positions than when doing saber defense.
2. I'd be worried that this would over balance the game in the favor of attack. I suppose a swing parry could be less likely to successfully parry vs a purely defensive. As such, I think it would end up complicating things more than the value of new feature.

And on to "new" business :)
1. After play testing with humans a bit more, we need to consider the player movement speeds. I noticed that it's too easy/unrealistic in the way that defending/lossing players can dart out of the way by running backwards. The same problem applies to gunners. As such, I'm thinking that a wise course of action would be to lower the movement speed of backwards running and pure (IE totally left/right) strafing. A real person isn't able to run sideways or backwards THAT much faster than they can walk quickly backwards/strafe.

JRHockney*
01-11-2006, 04:21 AM
I see the logic in the problems you stated for the swing parrying idea. :violin:

I will probably still try to use swings as blocks in my own fighting style because It doesnt cost any dp and it confuses that heck out of human opponents! lol. Who knows, if I can figure out how to code, I might try adding the suggestion myself just to see if it works or not.

I do hope you keep my first Idea about longer volleying by prohibiting stuns until 50% dp or so and knockdowns and disarms until under maybe 40 fp. As long as a successful attack and a successful defense cause the same amount of dp loss, it should be balanced. I also think the slight delay idea (my second post) that I put after it will be a good one too go with it. If you have a better idea on how this type of volleying could take place, I'd love to hear it. I think that anything that would keep the action alive with out the overly prevailent stuns will make few people I've talked to who don't like this system give it another chance.

Your idea about making running backwards slower is a great idea especially with this combat system. It will keep saber combat in close proximity and it won't be a death sentence for gunners because they still have the dodge meter. Good Thinkin. :sbdance I love the smile face options here! lol

As far as saberists dealing with gunners, I might also suggest making an anti-gunner saber key that allows saberists to run and attack without stopping or using force power. The catch with this would be if when using this anti-gunner saber style, if a saber hits you or you hit a saber with your saber, you get disarmed!

razorace
01-11-2006, 05:28 AM
I am planning on trying your volley related suggestions. Don't worry. :)

As for an anti-gunner style, it's a bit unnessicary since players can already run and attack without penalty as mishaps only occur during saber-on-saber impacts.

JRHockney*
01-11-2006, 03:05 PM
Hooray!! This is worthy of another Strongbad dance! :sbdance

About that last suggestion, I was mainly worried about force drain since it is still used in swinging and If I fought a few gunners, I might not have any force power left for fighting someone with a saber (kind of like what happened when I tried to fight you after fighting that gunner that one time). Of course this is only a problem when fp gain is set more slowly than default like it is on fridays usually. It probably wouldn't be a problem otherwise. And the mishaps from this suggestion would only happen on saber contact so people wouldn't be able to swing spam with no fp loss when fighting another saberist.

Your previous suggestion about slower running backward would also solve this problem mostly, my suggestion is only if you felt it wasn't enough to kill good gunners. I'm still think in MB mode when it comes to fighting gunners so it probably isn;t needed too badly. I often forget that jedi can use guns in this mod!

razorace
01-11-2006, 03:37 PM
Hmmm, I'm not sure if it's a problem or not since a player's FP reserve is very large. In theory, you can make 100 swings while running before you run out of fatigue. We'll have to wait and see. Remember that the gunners may or may not have a lot of Dodge based on their current skill level (not currently implimented).

JRHockney*
01-12-2006, 02:10 AM
Ok, I'll mess around with it some more on friday and try to figure out why I lost so much fp from fighting gunners with a saber. It could be the slower fp gain you have set there too. Correct me if I'm wrong, but with that lower fp gain setting, doesn't fp go down from running too with that setting?

razorace
01-12-2006, 03:00 AM
Actually FP doesn't go down from running, which was a compromise that I made with a previous design partner. Good call ytmh!

razorace
01-12-2006, 05:15 AM
Ok, I've implimented the volley suggestions you made so that players do a slow bounce instead of a stun @ 50+ DP and instead of a knockdown @ 50+ FP.

This does dramatically change the pacing of the battle as the saber blows attack/defense transition are much faster. I also like the fact that you can get a good idea of how much DP/FP your opponent has based on which mishaps occur to him. Good so far.

However, the saber battles do seem to be over much faster since the action is faster. My guess is that the fights last a little bit longer than MB2 saber battles, but are shorter than the previous versions of Enhanced. As such, I think we might need to increase the DP/FP reserve size, decrease DP/FP costs, or maybe both.

Anyway, time permitting, I'll release a new version of Enhanced including all the latest improvements for weekly Enhanced run on the server this friday.

JRHockney*
01-12-2006, 07:13 PM
Wow, that was fast! Based on what I have learned of coding so far, I figured it wouldn't take too long (probably a few variable switches and some new or modified boolian formulas that I couldn't figure out right now to save my life! LOL). Good job, I can hardly wait to try it. :drool1:

However, the saber battles do seem to be over much faster since the action is faster. My guess is that the fights last a little bit longer than MB2 saber battles, but are shorter than the previous versions of Enhanced. As such, I think we might need to increase the DP/FP reserve size, decrease DP/FP costs, or maybe both.


Believe it or not, I was thinking the exact same thing when I was visualizing this! But I think forgot mention it before in my writing; I'll have to re-read it. I was worried about the length of the dual and how quickly the the block points would get to below 50. I think both the DP/FP point values should be modified, but use your best judgment on how much since you have immediate access to the changed gameplay and we'll (the game players) give our opinions or look for potential problems after the next realize on friday.

Also, keep in mind that once players start getting good at your saber system, the duals will be extended because of the the back and forth hit trading. While a fight with a noob on MB can last hardly any time 3-10 seconds, two vets fighting can take 1-4 minutes. I had a 3 minute long fight with a MB staff member a few nights ago.

You are on your way to creating a truly KILLER saber system and I hope Raven takes notice of what a good saber system really is, based on your's and MB's. :lsduel:

I think one of the next steps to take down the road will be to create a few new difficult to do exploits within the saber combat and give a few extra options of what to do and how to fight. I'll keep my imagination open.

Much further down the road, I think there should be effort put forth to make the five+ primary saber combat styles have characteristics of the 7+ known saber styles in starwars "folklore."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightsaber_combat

This could be done by changing certain values in attack, defense, jumping, singlesaberstaff, sabersaberdual, etc. It may also require a few animation changes in certain styles for the sake of distintiveness. You could probably use parts of Moviestances 2.0 and the theatrics animation mod for ForcemodIII to save some time with animations.

....and yes this would be alot of work and brain storming on how to keep all the styles balanced. Heck, if you really wanted to set your self apart from everybody (including ForcemodIII because they have seven styles for single) trying to make a version of ALL these saber styles on the link above!!! Wow what a work load that would be.

The reason I suggest this idea is because there have been many, MANY threads at the MB site asking for this and discussing this, and the MB staff doesn't seem to want to do it (because the the work involved and their lack of coders {last time I checked}) Doing this may give everyone (who is use to a certain sabersystem, base or MB wise, and doesn't like change) more incentive to try your system.

razorace
01-12-2006, 07:35 PM
Well, I'll admit up front that I'm not a fan of the 7 forms theory of lightsaber combat. I personally think that it was invented simply to ease the mind of some fans that think that lightsaber combat is more a formalized martial art like real world stuff.

Instead, I feel that lightsaber combat is more a personal reflection of a jedi's connection to the Force. This seems to be reflected in the movies more than the 7 forms theory.

However, I agree that the individual styles should have slightly different attributes to them to make them be bit different and more realistic. I'm open to suggestions. :)

JRHockney*
01-12-2006, 08:10 PM
Wow, that was a quick response. I agree that it probably was as you say:

to ease the mind of some fans that think that lightsaber combat is more a formalized martial art like real world stuff.

But it still is a very popular concept amount JA and Knights of the old public players.

Anyways, I'll keep thinking about possibilities on how they can be different. But I did have one quick idea that is not very well thought out yet. Make two different styles of each of the 5 forms, one based on offense and the other on defense. The offense version would be a little quicker in swings, have a few extra flips in the swing animations and have less DP but maybe more FP. The defensive version would be a little bit slower, more DP, and normal animations. Naturally, both versions red and desanns styles would be slower and stronger than both versions of yellow, blue and tavions.

Also, allow each player to only choose 3 or 4 of these styles!!! This would allow for specialization among players and balance issues could be excused by bad choice of forms! lol. Heck, you could even create a saber only game mode or a special edition to holocron where you can earn extra styles to use in a particular game.

As far as changing animations for the quicker versions, there are plenty of animation replacements to choose from that are already apart of other mods to make the quicker style look cool. For example:

http://www.pcgamemods.com/mod/13578.html

Check out the animation replacement for tavions style for this when you have time (if you already haven't). It is one of my all time favorites because it remains me on fencing and is unique in that fashion.

Like I said, I haven't given too much that to this particular idea yet so let me know what you think or how possible it is. I'm too tired to think right now! lol. Nap time.

razorace
01-12-2006, 08:16 PM
I remember discussing the possibility of having a Offensive/Defensive mode to the saber styles but I think we dropped it after we realized that we were over complicating the system when we could have that back/forth action without needing seperate modes.

As for most animation mods, they're kind of hacky as they don't have all the proper transitions animations.

razorace
01-12-2006, 09:06 PM
Hmmm, actually, the current "issue" appears to been when two players just come at each other swinging like mad men. Right now, attack-on-attack mishaps are pretty rare so they can just spam attack each other for quite a while. I don't think that's really what we want but I'm not sure what to do about it yet. My guess is that we're going to have to add much larger mishaps to start the initial back/forth position.

JRHockney*
01-12-2006, 10:42 PM
I remember discussing the possibility of having a Offensive/Defensive mode to the saber styles but I think we dropped it after we realized that we were over complicating the system when we could have that back/forth action without needing seperate modes.

As for most animation mods, they're kind of hacky as they don't have all the proper transitions animations.

Interesting, I just figured some people would want the option of their favorite style being more offensive or defensive but it would make things more complicated.

And youre right about those animation mods being buggy and I now think I recall Keshire not liking them because they arent very well done in that fashion. Most of them are just replacements using pre-existing animations and they do lack alot of transitions. They are still fut o use on ocasion though, I still use Moviestances 2.0 for movie battles.

Hmmm, actually, the current "issue" appears to been when two players just come at each other swinging like mad men. Right now, attack-on-attack mishaps are pretty rare so they can just spam attack each other for quite a while. I don't think that's really what we want but I'm not sure what to do about it yet. My guess is that we're going to have to add much larger mishaps to start the initial back/forth position.

Hmmmm, are these testers familiar with how the saber system works really well? If they are, they are probably thinking very quickly and trying to figureout and what direction to move into. Remember, this is very new to them and no one's a pro yet. They could also just like the way the constant swinging and defending looks (like I am with a TAB BOT) and getting caught up in the moment because of how movielike it looks compard to other systems. In the movies, the speed at which they swing at eachother could also be considered spamming but they are really thinking very fast, just like in this system.

I say, make sure they know the rules of the saber system and give it more time for them to learn how to fight with the changes. Or let me at em!!!! I'll show them how to really fight OJP style!!! LOL.

As far as options are concerned, I suppose you could implement some kind of power swing that would disarm a swing spammer once they start getting below a certain FP level because they would get low on it after too many swings.

Wait, I've got it! Male the penalty for getting hit while trying to kick less! If a person gets hit while they are trying to kick, they only lose a few DP rather than having their dodge activated! I know its kind of like the MB saber malee, but having kick with all styles was kind of like that before anyway. Hopefully this won't result in too much kicking.

If the problem really is just lack of knowledge of this saber system, maybe you and I should fight tomarrow and see how it ends up. I can probably be online anytime after 4 pm mountain time.

JRHockney*
01-12-2006, 11:13 PM
Oh wait a minute, I think I see what youre saying. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this could be the swing blocking I was talking about when I fight the Tabbots. they both swing, but no mishap happens and no DP is drained because the the sabers are just colliding. Maybe this these guys have learned this and are doing what they can to prevent DP loss. Well, thats one way of making the fights longer! lol. Remember my swing parrying idea about using the ALT ATTACK button to turn an attacking in to a defensive parrying? Although I'm aware of the problems you stated with it before, this might be a good remedy.

I could be wrong in all may presumptions here so you might have to clarify whats happening a bit more.

razorace
01-12-2006, 11:32 PM
Wait, I've got it! Male the penalty for getting hit while trying to kick less! If a person gets hit while they are trying to kick, they only lose a few DP rather than having their dodge activated! I know its kind of like the MB saber malee, but having kick with all styles was kind of like that before anyway. Hopefully this won't result in too much kicking.
wha? I'm not really sure what this would accomplish.

As for the swinging spamming, after some additional time playing with the system, I'm thinking that maybe I was just over worrying about the problem. From what I can tell, the spamming only occurs if the players are only hitting saber-on-saber in the first place.

I also slightly increased the block animaiton times to make them a touch more obvious (and that seems to have helped with the attack spamming).

Also, based on the amount of negative feedback on the attack fake starts, I thinking that we might we want to go back to the old style system of using !attack + alt_attack.

JRHockney*
01-12-2006, 11:55 PM
Forget what I said in the first response, I misunderstood what was going on and miss diagnoised the problem. DOH! :headbump (sobbing) I'm a bad doctor! I also wrote it right after I got up from my nap.

I also slightly increased the block animaiton times to make them a touch more obvious (and that seems to have helped with the attack spamming).

Good idea, especially if it doesn't slow down the action by much.

Also, based on the amount of negative feedback on the attack fake starts, I thinking that we might we want to go back to the old style system of using !attack + alt_attack.

Honestly, thats probably a good idea. I often end up kicking first rather than faking and entering dodge as the saber passes through my kick.

razorace
01-13-2006, 01:32 AM
Well, I'm referring to the fakes you can perform now by simply not holding down the attack button.

Also, in other news, I'm adding new saber effects to make them more like the moves. For now, I'm altering the saber-on-saber clash effect.

JRHockney*
01-13-2006, 07:01 PM
Well, I've been playing around with it for a while, and I must say its alot of fun to watch and the action is much better. I've already heard a few people say that they like it alot more than before and I haven't heard any complaints. So its going over pretty well so far I would say.

Great saber flashes! Very movie like. It might make the combat a little more intense if they were just a little bit bigger or maybe brighter..... but then again it may interfere with concentration. Might be worth a try though.

There are a few issues I've noticed with the game and gameplay though:

1. For some reason, the FFA map on the meatgrinder keeps crashing after a few minutes of play. I'm pretty sure it was the server because It wouldn't come back up for a little bit and when it did, it was a different map. I only seemed to hapen when actual people join and played for a while.

2. There is still some disarming going on long before I reach 50- FP or even DP and this even happens when I use a stronger style (but so far, no premature stuns, which is a good sign).

3. Hit detection could use some improvement. The bouncing effect also does not seem as strong as it use to be, but this could just be my imagination because of the block freezes. Its too bad the block animations don't have more frames in the draw back.

4. I wonder if using Keshire's block animations would look better with this. He's always been very proud of them and I've always wanted to see those in action.

Overall, Great accomplishment for such a short period of time. I sure the combat will become alot more solid in the next versions. I love that fact that I have to think alot quicker now. Its all about watching the other guy's saber and movements.

Question: Is it technically possible to make the first person perspective more of a panoramic? It might help to get a better overall view of the swings, but it sounds like it would be hard, if not impossible to implement.

razorace
01-13-2006, 09:10 PM
Well, I've been playing around with it for a while, and I must say its alot of fun to watch and the action is much better.
Good!

Great saber flashes! Very movie like. It might make the combat a little more intense if they were just a little bit bigger or maybe brighter..... but then again it may interfere with concentration. Might be worth a try though.
I think they're fairly movie realistic as is. I think I'll wait on more feedback on it before changing it as I don't want it to be distracting. :)

1. For some reason, the FFA map on the meatgrinder keeps crashing after a few minutes of play.
I'll keep an eye on it. thanks for the heads up.

2. There is still some disarming going on long before I reach 50- FP or even DP and this even happens when I use a stronger style (but so far, no premature stuns, which is a good sign).
Yeah, I know. I didn't block that behavior yet but it looks like it really needs to be done as well. Plus, I think the disarm percentages need to be nerfed a bit.

3. Hit detection could use some improvement. The bouncing effect also does not seem as strong as it use to be, but this could just be my imagination because of the block freezes. Its too bad the block animations don't have more frames in the draw back.
I know that the hit detection isn't perfect, but I'm at the end of options that are fairly easy to do. I could try some other things but I'm not sure how successfull it would be AND it would really change the way the code runs.

4. I wonder if using Keshire's block animations would look better with this. He's always been very proud of them and I've always wanted to see those in action.
Yeah, we could try that too. It's just a hassle to add that many animations to the mix. :) Plus, the last time we tried it it wasn't as successful as I had hoped.

Question: Is it technically possible to make the first person perspective more of a panoramic? It might help to get a better overall view of the swings, but it sounds like it would be hard, if not impossible to implement.
With True View, you can change the fov with cg_truefov.

JRHockney*
01-14-2006, 04:08 PM
I just had an idea. I've noticed that the hit detection with MB2 is pretty decent when it comes to blocking and even swing blocking and how much the BP gets drained for certain hits. I was thinking that it might be because the blocking is done with only one button and it gives the system less to process. Maybe if you made it simpler to Block/parry, the hit detection would improve and it would be easier to defend against swing spammers (A problem that may develop as more people use this saber system).

My idea is this: Make the 4 parry directions (up, down, left, right based on the attack) only 2. I see 2 possibilities for this:

1. Parrying works with just the up (w) and down (s) keys. Up for parrying up-left, up, and up-right swings and down for side swings and down-left/right swings (or have it inverted like it is).

2. Have parrying up swings (straight down slice) as deflaut (no direction) and all swings to the to the right or left perried by moving in to them with the right (d) and left (a).

Since the action is now moving alot faster with this build (as it should), I figure that having a slightly simpler defense system might be easier on the players (to block multiple swings) and on the hit detection. I doubt this would help the hit detection as much as changing the animations or code in general as we talked about, but I think this would take much less time to change.

Of course, if this really did help the hit detection and make it too easy to defend, we may have to come up with another way to break through the defense or just tell people to fake alot more.

razorace
01-14-2006, 05:55 PM
Well, part of the reason that the blocks aren't as "accurate" is due to me using the bounding box instead of the actual player model for the area at which the players block saber attacks. I did this to help with the illusion of sabers not passing thru player's bodies unless the swing actually hits the player for damage. However, the actual player models are still used for damage hit detection. Unfortunately, we have a limited amount of block animations that we can use for blocking incoming attacks. We could add in Keshire's block positions, but we can get to that in due time. :)

As for MB2's saber system, I'm not familar with what they internally after the cooperative split. I have a copy of the MB2 source from when Phunk moved on to other projects but I honestly haven't messed with it. Unfortunately, untagged code is very hard to port features. (Plus, I'm not into the mod porting business much anymore anyway. I got hellish, unorganized porting work dumped on me one too many times.)

As for the parrying, that's the way the system currently works. IE, up-left attack can be blocked by any move made within one direction position of it (left, up, and left/up).

JRHockney*
01-14-2006, 10:00 PM
Well, part of the reason that the blocks aren't as "accurate" is due to me using the bounding box instead of the actual player model for the area at which the players block saber attacks. I did this to help with the illusion of sabers not passing thru player's bodies unless the swing actually hits the player for damage. However, the actual player models are still used for damage hit detection. Unfortunately, we have a limited amount of block animations that we can use for blocking incoming attacks. We could add in Keshire's block positions, but we can get to that in due time.

I see, so making it simplier than it is probably wouldn't do a thing. And I love that bounding box! It makes the combat look so much better. MB has a similiar function I think, but because everyones always running there, the saber still pass through people even though there is a draw back. The MB team decided to use this to cause gradual HP damage to shorten the saber fights, but I think it looks unrealistic. If only they would penalize running more!!

As for MB2's saber system, I'm not familar with what they internally after the cooperative split. I have a copy of the MB2 source from when Phunk moved on to other projects but I honestly haven't messed with it. Unfortunately, untagged code is very hard to port features. (Plus, I'm not into the mod porting business much anymore anyway. I got hellish, unorganized porting work dumped on me one too many times.)

Thats a shame, they could use a good coder like you. At present time, even though your saber system isnt quite as polished as theirs, yours definitely looks more movie realistic and probably even has more potential.

As for the parrying, that's the way the system currently works. IE, up-left attack can be blocked by any move made within one direction position of it (left, up, and left/up).

Wow, with in one space! Even diagnally! Thats easier than I thought, never mind.

I'll keep thinking based on this new information.

razorace
01-15-2006, 01:19 AM
:)

JRHockney*
01-15-2006, 06:19 AM
I have a 2 questions and a suggestion and a bug report.

Question 1: when I successfully parry a person and their saber freezes, am I supposet to still lose DP? I notice I still do lose at least a little.

Question 2: Since the parry for a top down slice is back (s) because its inverted, does that mean that a parry for a top right (my right) slice is back-right (s and d) or is it inverted also to back-left?

Suggestion: I think that Tavions style and blue style should be slowed down to what yellow is now and maybe yellow style slowed down to desanns style but red stay the same. The speeds for tavion and blue are so fast that they end up rebounding most of way or all the way through the opponent and they are unbalanced because they are incredibly hard to defend against at that speed.

If you wonder why I suggest this, try fighting a tabbot in the holocron FFA who uses blue style, they are almost unbeatable without swing spamming. It is also more fun to watch and more movie like fight with slower styles because of the superior control and the cleaner rebound action (ahh huh huh...I said rebound action...huh huh huh).

Slowing down the styles a bit might also help with the hit detection (maybe). Along with this, it might be a good idea to make the faster styles weaker if they arent already. Of course, this is all assuming you don't still want to make all the styles the exact same speed.

Bug report: I notice that bots using blue style never freeze even in attack position when I parry them correctly and I don't recall ever freezing when I use it myself. Blue style bots and myself using blue and I think even tavions style only seem to get disarmed instead of briefly frozen.

I also noticed that when I try to kick in malee, I freeze in place for a few seconds.

razorace
01-15-2006, 08:02 AM
1. Parrying still reduces DP by the same amount as normal blocks. I suppose we could try changing that.

2. Only the vertical axis is reversed. right/left is in terms of the player's left/right and not the attacker's. The reason why the vertical axis is reversed is for logical/gameplay reasons. An defender that is under attack from overhead swings (which is an advancing move for the attacker) would probably move backwards. Plus, from a gameplay persphective, this makes a defender naturally move backwards since an attacker is going to make a lot of overhead swings while he's moving towards the player (thanks for the JKA saber swing control system).

As for the attack speeds, I know this sounds unbelievable but the last time I checked, the actual attack animations ARE running at the same speed based on fps and frame numbers. At least this is the case for all the normal styles and probably the hidden ones as well. Granted, the starts/returns/transitions animations DO seem to take different amounts of time (most notably with the red style).

Anyway, a lot of the saber style's windup speeds are offset by swing range. While the blue styles do seem to move fast, they also don't have nearly the range as red or yellow.

That being said, I agree that styles do need some differences in terms of pros/cons to make them more even and enjoyable to use in their own right. I'm open to suggestions on what these pros/cons should be. However, I don't beleive in rock-paper-scissor saber combat so I feel that each difference needs to be justified logically.

For example, all single handed styles should have a penalty to their disarment chances since the sabers aren't being held by two hands. This is one way I think we can help balance the dual/double sabers vs the single saber styles.

I haven't seen a lack of slow bounces in the blue style but I'll keep an eye out of it.

Finally, the kicking bug has been resolved as of yesterday. :)

JRHockney*
01-15-2006, 06:07 PM
1. Parrying still reduces DP by the same amount as normal blocks. I suppose we could try changing that.


Might be a good idea, but I suppose it could stay the same as long as the parried person loses more DP from that parry than you do from doing the parry.

As for the attack speeds, I know this sounds unbelievable but the last time I checked, the actual attack animations ARE running at the same speed based on fps and frame numbers. At least this is the case for all the normal styles and probably the hidden ones as well. Granted, the starts/returns/transitions animations DO seem to take different amounts of time (most notably with the red style).

Does this mean its not possible to slow down the styles individually? If it is at all possible still think the faster styles should be slowed down. Since they obviously have less animation frames than the slower style, may they should get less fps. They should hopefully rebound cleaner this way unless its the fault of the animations.

Anyways, I have a few more hopefully logical suggestions after playing with the styles for a while:

1. I think the freeze time caused by a successful parry or hit should be longer depending on the style that they where hit or parried with. Tavion and blue styles should cause a short freeze while red should cause the longest freeze. I've notice when I fought with red that if I parry someone, freeze ends long before I can finish my swing.

2. Make the block animation after doing a successful parry terminate quicker than it does. This often prevents a person who has done a parry from attacking the other person before the other person recovers from the parry they just recieved. I think this is also one of the reason way attacking is much more effective than parrying so far.

3. Make the faster styles do less DP damage. When I fight a Blue style tabbot and miss with a parry or get frozen from a hit, they swing spam and tear me to shreads very quickly. If they are going to stay that speed, they need some serious disadvantages. Red should still do the most damage, but not by much. If possible, staff should be weak but have more DP so it becomes a great weapon for fighting 2 or more people.

For example, all single handed styles should have a penalty to their disarment chances since the sabers aren't being held by two hands. This is one way I think we can help balance the dual/double sabers vs the single saber styles.

Good Idea, but I wouldn't penalize desann's style too much, its already pretty slow compared to the others. I would also make the dual sabers and staff move a bit slower because its alot harder to tell what direction they are swinging.

Soooooooo, do ya think you'll have the next build by next friday again! lol. That was really fast last time! :animelol:

razorace
01-15-2006, 07:17 PM
Might be a good idea, but I suppose it could stay the same as long as the parried person loses more DP from that parry than you do from doing the parry.
Well, I kind of like the idea of having DP only go down if you're getting attacked. That way we're heavily encouraging people to be offensive and not turtle their way to victory.

Does this mean its not possible to slow down the styles individually? If it is at all possible still think the faster styles should be slowed down. Since they obviously have less animation frames than the slower style, may they should get less fps. They should hopefully rebound cleaner this way unless its the fault of the animations.
No, I have complete control over the animations, if we need to tweak them, I can and have done so. :)

1. I think the freeze time caused by a successful parry or hit should be longer depending on the style that they where hit or parried with. Tavion and blue styles should cause a short freeze while red should cause the longest freeze. I've notice when I fought with red that if I parry someone, freeze ends long before I can finish my swing.
An interesting idea, we might have to try that. But is it logical to have the freeze times differ based on the defender's style or the attacker's style?

As for the slow bounce times, I agree that they don't seem long enough in some cases, I think I'll make it a little be longer in the next release.

2. Make the block animation after doing a successful parry terminate quicker than it does. This often prevents a person who has done a parry from attacking the other person before the other person recovers from the parry they just recieved. I think this is also one of the reason way attacking is much more effective than parrying so far.
Yeah, I've been struggling with the parry visual effect. I tried using the projective block animations but they're just too fast to be seen in saber combat most of the time. I'll see what I can do about speeding up the parry animations or maybe just use the knockaway animations whenever a parry is performed.

3. Make the faster styles do less DP damage. When I fight a Blue style tabbot and miss with a parry or get frozen from a hit, they swing spam and tear me to shreads very quickly. If they are going to stay that speed, they need some serious disadvantages. Red should still do the most damage, but not by much. If possible, staff should be weak but have more DP so it becomes a great weapon for fighting 2 or more people.
I'm liking these ideas. :) But, again, should the DP costs be based on the defender's style or the attacker's style? Maybe both?

Soooooooo, do ya think you'll have the next build by next friday again! lol. That was really fast last time! :animelol:
Maybe, as my school workload goes up, I'll have less and less time for the mod.

JRHockney*
01-15-2006, 11:11 PM
Well, I kind of like the idea of having DP only go down if you're getting attacked. That way we're heavily encouraging people to be offensive and not turtle their way to victory.


Good point. Plus, I like the greater ephesis on attacking in order to win a fight. As long as being defensive isn't too dangerous or less useful.

An interesting idea, we might have to try that. But is it logical to have the freeze times differ based on the defender's style or the attacker's style?


I've been debating this along time in my head and I think it should be based on the attackers style because they are the ones who need to follow up with a swing. Two Red style fighters would never get any hits on eachother after parrying if their freeze time was too short.

As for the slow bounce times, I agree that they don't seem long enough in some cases, I think I'll make it a little be longer in the next release.

I'd be careful about this one. I would say that it might be better to work on making the parry animations shorter first so the parrying guy can swing faster. The knockaway animation might work better for this as you suggested. However, if you can't get this done or the attack style based slow bounces (the last idea) done before you make the next release, then its probably a good idea.

I'm liking these ideas. But, again, should the DP costs be based on the defender's style or the attacker's style? Maybe both?

Again I had to think about this very hard. I would say both, in a way. DP damage should also be based on the attackers style here, however, different styles will have different DP gains. Staff should have the fastest DP gain and do light to moderate DP damage, thus, making it the best defensive weapon for fighting two or more people. Dual sabers would do maybe Moderate to high DP damage but have a slowest DP gain. Red would have a pretty fast DP gain and do the most DP damage while tavion style would have a fairly slow DP gain and do the least DP damage. Mind you, these differences would have to be fairly small in order to keep it balanced.

I just had an interesting idea. Since the focus in more on attack now, I think there should be some strategy when both people are swinging. I was thinking about how in MB2, the point of the HPing system is to hit the opponent anywhere his saber isn't even when they are blocking or swing blocking. This gives me an idea:

When both saberists are swinging, whoever hits their opponent first anywhere their opponent's saber isn't (maybe two swing positions away or a virtual foot from the opponents saber), it will cause that opponent to lose some DP and it will make the rest of the opponents last swing do no damage or maybe even enter block. If a saberist senses that he is about to be hit first, he can try to turn so the swing hits his saber instead of him. This will give the faster styles a big advantage to make up for there short comings that I have already suggested being implemented. Is this idea even possible?

Maybe, as my school workload goes up, I'll have less and less time for the mod.

yep, we have like one more day of none-school freedom!!

Oh yeah, I almost forgot. Try using the saber sounds from Movie stances 2.0.
http://jediknight2.filefront.com/file/Movie_Stances_20;37063
They really make the combat sound more intense.

JRHockney*
01-16-2006, 03:57 AM
I just thought of another crazy idea that your welcome to say "no way" on, because it would change alot of the dynamics of the system. This may or may not have to do with some of my previous suggestions above.

As I was messing arond with the tabbots tonight, I started tapping the attack button just as they were about to hit me. and it seemed to block them in a swing block fashion without losing DP if I did it right and it I was moving in a parry direction it also seemed to parry them. An idea came out of this.

My crazy idea it this: Get rid of auto block and make the fakestarting (or beginning swing) animations into what will be more of an active block. As long as the fakestarting animation has started and is still going even through the drawback animation after you let go of the attack button, your character with block the swing, lose DP, and, and do the proper block animation. You can still parry by pressing the right direction, but you have to have tap attack in order to parry block. An actual attack comes by holding down the attack button long enough to pass a certain point in the beginning swing animation and DP damage still only comes by attacking. If you do not at least tap the attack button an start up your swinging animation for an attackers swing, you will not block the swing and your Dodge will activate. A collision of to attacking sabers that have passed the point of where it is a block or fake still just collide with no DP loss (unless maybe one of them hits the opponent first where his saber isnt and my idea in the previous post takes place).

I think this might be good for two reasons:

1. It would make the system a little bit more realistic in terms of active blocking (which cant be spammed because it costs too much).

2. It would make the transition to a block animation look smoother because character has already started to move his arms into something.

Crazy but maybe logical, huh?

razorace
01-16-2006, 05:25 AM
When both saberists are swinging, whoever hits their opponent first anywhere their opponent's saber isn't (maybe two swing positions away or a virtual foot from the opponents saber), it will cause that opponent to lose some DP and it will make the rest of the opponents last swing do no damage or maybe even enter block. If a saberist senses that he is about to be hit first, he can try to turn so the swing hits his saber instead of him. This will give the faster styles a big advantage to make up for there short comings that I have already suggested being implemented. Is this idea even possible?
This is already the case with the current system, however, the first player to "get hit" does have to automatically enter into a block move.

As for your second suggestion, I REALLY don't think that button-based blocking can practically work at these attack speeds. I've already tried several different button-based blocking systems and it's simply too fast for the average player to be able to handle. I'm sure there's a few godlike players some where out there how could manual blocking like that, but I don't think that's something that the average player can enjoy. :)

That being said, I can see it making sense to have the attack fakes causing parry-like results in attack-on-attack situations. I could set it up that way, but I don't think it will be used very often. Right now the faking system isn't used very often. It's tricky to use even for myself.

However, your idea of using the start animations as blocks is rather interesting. I'll have to think about it, but using them might give the system a bit more visual heft. Good idea. I'll get back to you on that.

JRHockney*
01-16-2006, 03:56 PM
This is already the case with the current system, however, the first player to "get hit" does have to automatically enter into a block move.

Cool, I was wondering why one of us (me and a tabbot or another player) seems to win in a swing fight.

As for your second suggestion, I REALLY don't think that button-based blocking can practically work at these attack speeds. I've already tried several different button-based blocking systems and it's simply too fast for the average player to be able to handle. I'm sure there's a few godlike players some where out there how could manual blocking like that, but I don't think that's something that the average player can enjoy.

Yeah, I figured that was a stretch. LOL

That being said, I can see it making sense to have the attack fakes causing parry-like results in attack-on-attack situations. I could set it up that way, but I don't think it will be used very often. Right now the faking system isn't used very often. It's tricky to use even for myself.

Maybe if the dfender chooses the perfect angle in a fake to meeting the incoming attack, it will do a shorter parry and because its a fake, the defender can counter attack quicker. That might help its usage.

However, your idea of using the start animations as blocks is rather interesting. I'll have to think about it, but using them might give the system a bit more visual heft. Good idea. I'll get back to you on that.

Yeah, totally. I suppose the animation could even end with a standard block animation.


ON a side note, I just made my first "Hello, World!" program with Java and a few others! LOL

JRHockney*
01-16-2006, 07:12 PM
I just had another idea. I've already tried to sell a similiar idea to this to the MB site, but it may actually be more practical with this system.

I think that turning moves in all styles should do more DP damage and even force a slow draw back. The trick with this is that doing a turning move will cost more FP, be slower and will cause a big DP loss and slow drawback freeze to the attacker if the attacker gets hit in the back while he's doing it. I think it would add some depth to the attack on attack portion of the fighting and also make saberists avoid doing turning attacks unless appropriate and thus making saber on saber combat based less on random swings (noobs will get slaughtered!!! WAAAAHAHAHAA!). The faster styles will only get a slightly increased DP attack bonus (if any) and red style will cause huge DP loss and the longest slow draw back or maybe even a stun. Some saber flipping animations might be cool to use with these as well.

razorace
01-17-2006, 12:46 AM
mmm, are you referring to the actual spin move or the attack that immediately follows said move?

JRHockney*
01-17-2006, 03:34 AM
mmm, are you referring to the actual spin move or the attack that immediately follows said move?

I'm refering to the spin swing that follows a normal swing usually in a combo when swung in a similiar direction to the last swing (unless done when landing from a jump when it sometimes happens). Along with the benefits and risks I listed above, this spin move should also be able to get parried itself too if the defender does it right.

Its primary function will be to strategically break through a series of volleying attack on attack swings while causing some DP damage or give the defender an opening when the attacker tries the spin. It will make the attack on attack saber combat more disciplined because both saberists will have to avoid spinning until planned. Since its unrealistic to turn your back in a sword fight in the first place, combo spinning should be risky but stronger from the momentum. I think adding a feature like this would really increase the depth of this system and make it even more unique.

I suppose you could even assign a manual button to start up these spin swings without comboing, but I kind of like the discipline of avoiding spin moves. Then again, this comboing power spin idea might limit the types of chain combo directions that can take place without risk if there is no manual button for it, but I don't see that as being too much of a sacrifice.

razorace
01-17-2006, 03:35 AM
Well, I just looked into it and it looks like using the swing start or swing return animations just doesn't look right for parrying or blocking. As such, I'm thinking it might be time to dust off the old keshire block animations and reimpliment them. That way we'll have a two-tiered saber combat animation library, one set for attacks and one for blocks. Hopefully with my better knowledge of the saber animation system I'll be able to impliment them in a way that will look good (which was a problem previously).

I think the main problem last time was that I didn't link the automatic movement cycling into the new animations. As such, the animations would look good until it was time to autoreturn to the ready position and then it would crap out and just jump back.

JRHockney*
01-17-2006, 03:44 AM
LOL! You post the second after I responded to that last question!

And, great! I'd love to see Keshire's blocks in action. I hope it works out.

JRHockney*
01-17-2006, 06:54 PM
Your probably knee deep in studying or your classes at the moment, but I thought I would point out a few bugs in the standard parry system in my last "beta testing" period.

I noticed that pushing up (w) or both diagnal up directions never seems to parry an attack even when they are swinging low. and pressing just the side buttons (a and d) rarely seems to work for side attacks.

The amazing thing is that I can parry any attack direction at just almost all the time by pressing down and most of the time by pressing both diagnal side/down directions! I've actually given up the side and up buttons all together for parrying at the moment.

Is this intended or related to fault hit detection maybe? If its neither, you might want to check your code again in this area when you get a chance because if it is just hitting the down key, that's probably too easy.

Btw, what do you think of my stronger yet more valnurable combo spin swing idea?

razorace
01-17-2006, 07:31 PM
Well, it's possible that the hitLoc directional code isn't broad enough. I think I borrowed that code from other part of basejka so it's entirely possible that that's the case. I'll look into it. :)

I suppose we can try the spin attack combo idea but I'm not sure it will do much. Remember that spins slow down the player movement quite a bit so it makes them fairly hard to land.

Sorry if I seem wary to make more DP/FP cost altering moves, it's just that coming up with all the nessicary tables for mishap propabilities is tuff. :)

JRHockney*
01-17-2006, 08:16 PM
I suppose we can try the spin attack combo idea but I'm not sure it will do much. Remember that spins slow down the player movement quite a bit so it makes them fairly hard to land.

I think its the slow movement that makes more of a balanced move because the defender has time to see it and attack it before it becomes a full swing, but he has to be paying attention otherwise he'll attack too late and get parried. Also, it will help determine who is a better saberist with this system because a one of them will either do these spin moves at inappropiate times or accidently do them and pay for it. Just like in real life sword combat, turning your back is usually a bad idea unless you know what youre doing.

Sorry if I seem wary to make more DP/FP cost altering moves, it's just that coming up with all the nessicary tables for mishap propabilities is tuff.

Hey no problem man. While I think the above idea is a good one, I'd say that it is not neccessarily a priority for the next build if it's going to be realised soon (which might be a good idea while youre work load isnt too insane and you have time to fix the existing bugs. I like to be able to market a really solid version of this saber system to the MB site and get people excited).

In my opinion, the biggest priorities from most to least important should be:

1. Fix the early disarm bug.

2. Figure out whats wrong with the directional parrying and why only back (s) seems to work (the problem I recently mentioned). That is, you you notice the same problem. Doing the new animations for the blocks might go with this too.

3. Making the saber styles different based on my previous suggestions. That is, if you still like them or haven't thought of a more balanced way of doing it.

4. Lastly and lowest priority, the stonger combo spin idea or maybe something similiar thats more powerful, risky, and breaks through attacks.

In other words, solidity of the saber system should always be the highest priority in my opinion.

For the next build, I would suggest that you, me or someone who knows the saber system well makes a manual for it that has all the features listed and the reader won't have to figure out what has been changed and what hasn't by reading about all the previous versions. I'd be happy to do it too if you want or you don't have time for it.

Most importantly, what ever you do, don't tire yourself out too much for the sake of this mod. Life always comes first, even when people like me are always throwing ideas at you! LOL. I'm sure you know this lesson well already given how long you've done this.

Vruki Salet
01-17-2006, 08:43 PM
Have you separated out those blocks and made them animation config file ready?

razorace
01-18-2006, 12:34 AM
mmm, I think I have the original source files for the animations and a version of it intergrated into an earlier version of the saber system. I'll have to mess with it when I have time.

JRHockney*
01-18-2006, 03:41 PM
I know I've been having alot of these lately (probably way too many to all be instituted anytime soon if at all) but I have another idea. This one, I think my very well be the coolest and most benefitial yet.

Remember when I suggested making an offensive and defensive style for each saber style and you thought it might overcomplicate things? Well, I just thought of a way to make the this idea work an a way too obvious to be overcomplicated (hopefully).

1. The Attack vs. Defense styles of each style with be based on a SITH (attack) vs JEDI (defense) model.

2. The Sith style will have stronger attacks and do a little more DP and much more HP damage than jedi style.

3. Only Jedi will have DODGE! Sith will have half the DP meter missing and only sustain lighter HP damage when their DP is gone or when their actual Dodge would otherwise activate.

4. Light and dark side force powers will be stronger based on whether you are using Jedi or sith style.

5. Jedi style would have a faster FP gain than Sith.

6. These two styles will have a separate toggle key with a 2 or so second delay on switching.

7. Make extra game options like Both JEDI/SITH (default), Jedi only (like OJP now) and Sith only.

Rational: Lets face it, not everyone likes the DODGE function (especially who play MB2, but I'm not one of these people) and those who don't should have an alternative. I would be more true to the fighting in the movies as well as the jedi or sith philosophy. It would make fighting two people easier because, I've found that swining is the best defense for surviving power duel and the fact that defense have faster FP gain but less attack power would make it easier to swing block while keeping it balanced. The toggle key would also allow a sith attacker to switch to jedi defense with after getting parried, but the 2 second delay would cause them to still lose some HP. It would also make it easier to regenate FP after a long fight as a Sith.

I know it would take a lot of time to do this, but what do you think about it?

razorace
01-19-2006, 01:51 AM
Again, I think adding defense/attack modes would be over complicating the system and not really gaining us anything.

As for Dodge, I realize that a lot of people aren't happy with it, but it is literally the only way to make the game playable with lethal damage and still allow for extended saber battles. Removing Dodge from Sith characters would only result in people whining their heads off about "instant death" when their character has its hand sliced off when they botch a move.

That being said, I understand that Dodge has its flaws (like Dodging off cliffs in the older versions) but I have been working to address them (like fall detection for said cliff Dodges).

razorace
01-19-2006, 01:54 AM
Oh, yeah. Also, having the force powers alter based on the attack/defense mode doesn't really make sense. You're either a dark sider or a light sider, it doesn't make logical sense to suddenly have different force skill advantages based on weither or not you're attacking. :)

So if I seem to be shooting down a lot of ideas. I'm really just trying to come up with what's best for the combat system.

JRHockney*
01-19-2006, 02:33 AM
Alright, yeah I suppose this would need to be better thought out in the first place. I didn't really consider how quickly to people using attack style would kill eachother with their heavy DP/HP damaging hits, only block and no dodge. The entire idea was more to make the system more universally appealing, but youre probably right that this isn't the way to do it. Back to the drawing board.

I guess I'll stick to endorsing my "proirity" list in my previous post.

One more thing though. I remember you saying in response to one of my ideas that if person's saber hits his opponent where the opponents saber isn't first while both players swinging in attack on attack combat, the opponent will lose DP and switch his swing to block. I was wondering if its possible to make that more sensitive than it is because when I try for that, it doesn't happen that often even when I get a solid hit away from their saber.

razorace
01-19-2006, 03:19 AM
Unfortunately, the Dodge issue is one that I've been struggling with since the MotF days. I don't expect a perfect alternative to just appear over night. :)

As for the attack-on-attack stuff, it really comes down to which player hits the other player's bounding box first. The first person to land an attacking swing onto the other guy's hit box forces that player into a block to defend himself. I hope that explain things a bit better.

But, that might change a little bit in the future. I've been musing over Keshire's block animations and how I could possibly impliment them in a way to make the blocking more realistic and better looking.

My current idea is to make the bounding box just be trigger for starting a block animation instead of the actual point of blocking impact. Right now, the bounding box counts as the impact point for the blade and that's the partial reason why the blocking animations seem to occur after the attacker's blade bounces. However, if I change this to make the bounding box just start the block animation, the attack swing should in theory hit the actual saber blade (assuming the block animations are good) a fraction of a second later. Please note that if I do that I'll still make the act of blocking count even if the attacker's blade technically slips past the block, which often happens with such intercate animations and player positions.

razorace
01-19-2006, 03:59 AM
BTW, nice catch on the directional parrying bias. I checked the code and it wasn't accounting for the fact that a player is much taller than they wide. I added a quick fix and it appears to have leveled out the directions a bit. Let me know if it needs more work after this week's E-Friday.

JRHockney*
01-19-2006, 07:22 PM
Unfortunately, the Dodge issue is one that I've been struggling with since the MotF days. I don't expect a perfect alternative to just appear over night.

I'm not anti dodge by any means, but I will keep thinking about possible alternatives to it, for the sake of idea making. Even if we do come up with a nice alternative, a modified dodge might still be a cool force power addition or something.

I did just one quick brain storm though on a possible dodge replacement but I don't know if it would work completely and I need your opinion:

1. Make all moves blockable whether they are attacking a slow drawback stun, an actual stun, a knock down (which may require giving knockdown its own bounding box {if possible} and at maybe a very quick blocking animation), and a disarm (I was thinking about maybe an automatic micro push for defending against attacks) UNTIL they run out of DP. All blocks and push blocks will use DP until its gone.

2. Make actual stuns show up at 25% DP. If a person is hit when they are stunned, unless they hit the proper parry direction, they will get stunned again until they are either out of DP or they parry the next attack. This would also be another excuse for the attacker to use fakes.

This system would obviously require more animating and probably some probability tables (which I know you hate).

Another idea is to replace the dodge system with a "micro-push" system that uses the bounding box and pushes the attackers saber back while giving the defender freedom to move away a bit before the next swing. For attacks on grounded or disarmed opponents it would work the same way.

For the most part, these are just crazy ideas that I put here so I dont forget them, but they might have potential in the distant future.

My current idea is to make the bounding box just be trigger for starting a block animation instead of the actual point of blocking impact. Right now, the bounding box counts as the impact point for the blade and that's the partial reason why the blocking animations seem to occur after the attacker's blade bounces. However, if I change this to make the bounding box just start the block animation, the attack swing should in theory hit the actual saber blade (assuming the block animations are good) a fraction of a second later. Please note that if I do that I'll still make the act of blocking count even if the attacker's blade technically slips past the block, which often happens with such intercate animations and player positions.

Great idea! That should make it look alot more solid. In order to cover up when the saber slips past the opponents saber, I might suggests either widening the saber flash or changing the position of it... And I still like the new flashes btw. Also, if its possible, you might what to see if you can make it so their is no further attacker's swing animation past the block and it just stops and maybe split second freezes athe the defenders saber even if it technically goes further; however based on what you've told me in the past, I doubt that this can be done right without serious bugs.

BTW, nice catch on the directional parrying bias. I checked the code and it wasn't accounting for the fact that a player is much taller than they wide. I added a quick fix and it appears to have leveled out the directions a bit. Let me know if it needs more work after this week's E-Friday.


Hey no problem. I love this beta testing stuff; especially since the tabbots arnt morons like in other mods! lol. You might want to make them run when I get a certain distance from them though. I love testing on Kahns Springfield Simpsons map, but its a big map for people to be walking around too much on, but its no big deal.

Assuming youre done in time, I look forward to friday........I mean tomarrow for some testing. I work after 2 pm so if you release it before then I will have time to check it out. That's assuming a lot though. Will it just be a fix release or have you had anytime to add a new feature or two?

JRHockney*
01-19-2006, 07:59 PM
I had another idea that I should put down before I forget it.

I realized that after parrying and kicking alot of tabbots even when they are in the quick draw back stun that eventually seasoned OJP Enhanced players will be able to spot one of these stuns really easily and kick there opponent over constantly. To solve this, I suggest making kick blockable or maybe even parryable (depending on which you think is fairer) by pressing up (w) or something. This might encourage players to change up their attack on a parry so the volleying can still take place even after people learn this trick really well. It might also encourage more use of side kicks and back kicks because they are less expected. ....actually, doesn't croutch block kick? The bots never kick me so I'm not sure. If you don't no, I'll find out tomorrow.

Just another idea to play with.

razorace
01-20-2006, 01:25 AM
Actually, I suspect that it would be really cool if the players could react to a kick when hit by doing a backflip (like Obi-Wan did in Episode 1).

As for friday, the next release has a couple of bug fixes and minor features, but I'm not sure how much it will have until it gets down to the wire. :) One such feature is that the TABBots now run when they aren't attempting to attack with the saber.

JRHockney*
01-20-2006, 01:44 AM
Actually, I suspect that it would be really cool if the players could react to a kick when hit by doing a backflip (like Obi-Wan did in Episode 1).

YEEEEEEAAAAAHHHHH!!!! That would kick major arse! An idea worthy of a Strongbad dance! :sbdance (Strongbad: "See, The Cheat. This is how cool ideas are made." The Cheat: "myphh hhmmmm")

I was also thinking that maybe at super close range, the kick would be substituted for a saber punch that would do a quick stun. It would be cool, but I'm not sure how balanced it would be or how needed.

On an unrelated note, I was wondering if you could fix the FP gain on you server so that at least meditation gains FP faster. I'm tired of hearing complaints about FP gain and I also don't want to waste an entire minute of gameplay in meditation while bot or players are swinging at me.

As for friday, the next release has a couple of bug fixes and minor features, but I'm not sure how much it will have until it gets down to the wire. :) One such feature is that the TABBots now run when they aren't attempting to attack with the saber.

Great! That feature will save everyone alot of grief on big maps. Good luck getting down to the wire.

Btw, I just figured out a way to use my old swing blocking idea without using any DP or FP Its reeeaaallly hard to do (as it should be), but it can be learned and used just enough to give a strong advantage to a person who learns it. It's not usbeatable though.

Basically, I found that if you tap attack and start the swing exactly or close to where the opponent is swinging from, your saber will still collide with theirs causing no DP loss and because you are doing a very quick fake, you lose no FP either and you can go right into attack! The angles and timing are very hard to learn though, so if this survives the next build transitions, it may become an OJP veterans secret tactic....or something like that. You should try it out.

razorace
01-20-2006, 02:42 AM
On an unrelated note, I was wondering if you could fix the FP gain on you server so that at least meditation gains FP faster. I'm tired of hearing complaints about FP gain and I also don't want to waste an entire minute of gameplay in meditation while bot or players are swinging at me.
Meditation regens fFP at triple the normal riate. I'll double check that to make sure.

As for the punch idea, maybe. I'd like to add more melee moves but I'm not sure how to control them. :)

JRHockney*
01-20-2006, 03:50 AM
Meditation regens fFP at triple the normal riate. I'll double check that to make sure.

What ever it has been the past couple of fridays is not nearly fast enough. If it is already at 3x, I say make it at least 4x or more. By the time it takes bots to walk over an kill me, I've only charged 15-20 FP.

razorace
01-20-2006, 04:02 AM
I'll check the force regen time after I turn the server on....which should be in a few mins.

razorace
01-20-2006, 04:56 AM
Well, I'm impressed. 0.0.5 is a definite improvement over 0.0.4.

In particular...
1. The visual feedback on the successful parries really makes me feel much more in control of the blocking.
2. The fact that successful parries don't cost DP makes the Dodge system and the skill-based gameplay really shine. I can now last up against 2 bots at once since my DP isn't draining. In fact, I bet a player can now regen DP/FP fairly easily by playing defensively.
3. The Dodge/defense opening fix solved the problem with Dodge causing huge DP drain/death almost randomly during the fights. As such, the fights are lasting longer on their own Yeah!

JRHockney*
01-20-2006, 04:33 PM
Great Job with the Bug fixes and the Tabbots are much scarier (although they do lose FP faster now). The saber system is the most solid I've every seen it.

The first two priorities on my old list can be crossed off unless I find a bug with them with further testing. I would like to add two new priorities to that list.

1. Figure out whats going on with the FFA server crashing. If this problem continues when people try to play Enhanced on their own FFA server, it might turn them off to this mod.

2. Figure out why meditating isn't gaining FP the way its suppose to.

I still believe in the other two prioities though.

razorace
01-20-2006, 11:25 PM
Maybe I'm mistaken but isn't the problem with Holocron FFA rather than pure FFA?

As for the regen speed, I'll look into it. I'll probably have to save working on it until next week since I'll have to add some debugger messages to the system to figure out what the dealo is.

JRHockney*
01-21-2006, 04:22 AM
Maybe I'm mistaken but isn't the problem with Holocron FFA rather than pure FFA?

Actually, I haven't seen any problems with the holocron. I have seen problems with the pure FFA "Rift Santuary" map though. It seems to crash or show the connection error after a minute or two of play. It actually happened today when you and I were fighting and that is not the first time I've seen it happen. It happened several times last week.

Btw, I hate to say this, but I found two weird bugs already.

1. I tried to fight some Tabbots in pure malee today and for some reason, after they hit me and my dodge activated, I couldn't kick until I switched back to my saber and off it again. For some reason, it only affected my kick and I could still punch and grap. To make things even stranger, when I got disarmed and got hit and my dodge activated, I could still kick! Thus, it only seems to effect the kick in pure malee.

2. For some reason when I power duel two TABbots, one of them almost always jumps on my head and runs in circles!! LOL! Is that intended!?

Also, while the parrying system is much improved as far as causing parries with the proper direction, it's still not perfect. I notice several times my Tabbot fights that I parried someone attacking low by moving backwards which shouldn't happen, so it might need a little more work. Next time you fight, try pressing down for a low attack and see what happens.

Crazy Suggestions of the Night:

1. Make each stance have its own unique stance. It's your mod, so give it some trademark stances............or just some different ones from the movies is fine too! LOL

2. Not that I don't enjoy having to fight at least 15-30 seconds for each person (even if they suck) but I would like to see some quicker fight ending opinions that require alot of skill and strategy. Considering how fast Darth Sidious killed three jedi, I figure its not too movie unrealistic. I would suggest making several of the existing special moves do more DP damage, cost a ton FP to use, leave the attacker very vulnerable, and kill the defender instantly if the defender attacks when getting hit or has low DP. This is my best attempt at balance here without thinking it over too much so you could probably figureout a more balanced way if you like the idea.

Moves like the butterfly, death from above (red style attack), the roll stab move, the behind stab move, and the yellow style arial attack are all pretty useless in this saber system at the moment. If they were given such benefits and downfalls as I listed above, they might actually be used once in awhile. These moves are also what gave the the crappy Base JA combat some strategy that didn't involve red style swing spam and they might be useful here if balanced right. You could even make up youre own risky moves or death combos if you wanted to. Maybe a hilt-bash-to-turning-stab like Darth Maul did.

Another crazy, probably flawed idea from JRHockney* everybody!!! (audience appluase)

razorace
01-21-2006, 06:08 AM
"Rift Santuary", got it. I'll give it a run thru it's paces on my local system and I'll hopefully figure it out.

Unfortunately, it looks like a lot of people went thru the server today and a lot of people were frustrated/unhappy. I suspect most of it is simply because people don't understand the system but it's still upsetting that the feedback (from the game logs) are so negative AND the fact that none of them bothered to post some feedback here. Ouch! Well, at least some people really liked the mod (probably about 10%). :)

Issues:
Logged. I'll check them out when I have time.

Suggestions:
1. I like the idea but I think the animations are already set up to start/end at the current stance positions. Changing them would make the animations look weird.

2. I'm not against finishing moves, however, I don't think we can really get into the one-shot-kill special moves without totally unbalancing the combat. This was something that I really didn't like about basejka saber combat.

In conclusion, look what Jawa Bond said on the server today. Bawhaha!
so alone so scary so pant-wetting frightening
ah **** im talking to bots again
bots u saw nothing
Gold!

JRHockney*
01-21-2006, 03:37 PM
Unfortunately, it looks like a lot of people went thru the server today and a lot of people were frustrated/unhappy. I suspect most of it is simply because people don't understand the system but it's still upsetting that the feedback (from the game logs) are so negative AND the fact that none of them bothered to post some feedback here. Ouch! Well, at least some people really liked the mod (probably about 10%).

Aw man. Don't let it get you down, I sure they just don't understand the system or the hard work you put into it. My suggestion: on the server startup/loading screen where it says OJP running enhanced, also say say something like "if you didn't read the manual, youre screwed!!" or "Notice: the saber system is different, read the manual for changes or die trying to figure it out" or something funny and scary like that. Too many people download something and punge right in to it without reading about it and this can't happen for such complex changes.

Just remember how impressed that one guy who was watching up fight was with how our fight looked. When you asked him for help, he said he was impressed watching us (paraphrazed).

1. I like the idea but I think the animations are already set up to start/end at the current stance positions. Changing them would make the animations look weird.


yeah, but there are alot of stance mods out there that don't look too bad in the transitions. I'm for now, I'm only suggesting changing the base stance to something more unique. As long as the stances arnt too outragous, the transitions should not look too bad. At the very least, I think tavion's stance and desann's stance should have their own unique stance, like maybe tavion's original stance for her style and maybe a dooku like stance for desanns. I also kind of like MB's way of making the walk animations (in block) represent what ever saber style they are using.

2. I'm not against finishing moves, however, I don't think we can really get into the one-shot-kill special moves without totally unbalancing the combat. This was something that I really didn't like about basejka saber combat.

All true, however if the risk is high enough for executing these moves, it shouldn't unbalance the combat, just make Sidious-like kills more rare and spectacular. Comments of the loser in such a situation like this should be like "aaww, I'm stupid. I Cant believe you hit me with that! LOL" or something along those likes. I'll continue to think about what fair risks should be. At the very least, there should be some kind of advantage and disadvange to these moves so they are not almost completely pointless to have.

I do think my "risky but powerful spin swing" idea is better and more thought out than this one, though. My old buddy Shawn Zaan notice my old post about this idea and suggested I make a thread about it. Now alot of people are starting to like it there and it has been getting alot of good comments. Will it be implemented? Probably not, because I'm not on the MB team. But who knows. It would still probably make even more sense for OJP Enhanced though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jawa Bond
so alone so scary so pant-wetting frightening
ah **** im talking to bots again
bots u saw nothing

LMAO!!! Now theres a guy who knows how to have fun with games!!! LOL

razorace
01-21-2006, 04:15 PM
My suggestion: on the server startup/loading screen where it says OJP running enhanced, also say say something like "if you didn't read the manual, youre screwed!!" or "Notice: the saber system is different, read the manual for changes or die trying to figure it out" or something funny and scary like that.
Unfortunately, we only have one line on that screen to get the message across. We also have the ingame MOTD which I added, but I'm not sure very many people actually see it. :( I might have to tweak that some more.

At the very least, I think tavion's stance and desann's stance should have their own unique stance, like maybe tavion's original stance for her style and maybe a dooku like stance for desanns.
Agreed. Have any specific suggestions? Wait, tavion had an original stance for her style?!

I also kind of like MB's way of making the walk animations (in block) represent what ever saber style they are using.
You mean like whil walking in basejka?

All true, however if the risk is high enough for executing these moves, it shouldn't unbalance the combat, just make Sidious-like kills more rare and spectacular.
Well, the problem is that moves that instant kill an fully healed opponent totally unbalance the game since the benifit of landing the hit is always greater than the cost of the move unless you nerf the crap out of it. However, I'm not against special purpose moves or finishing moves.

For example, I've been thinking about ways to deal with the existing specials and here's what I've been thinking.

The Yellow flip special seems to be primarily a manuvering special. You use it to flip over your opponent when 2-on-1 to get behind him. As such, I think this move should allow you to do that without the no block/dodge in mid-air penalty that normally applies to players in mid-air.

As for the Blue special, this should probably be a finishing move against players low on DP or FP, if this move lands and the defender doesn't parry it, it should slice their hand off (like in Episodes 2 and 5). This also happens to be vader's signature move. :) On the downside, this should probably cost more FP or cause the attack to go into a stun if he uses when the other player isn't low on DP/FP.

I do think my "risky but powerful spin swing" idea is better and more thought out than this one, though.
Well, I'm willing to give it a shot. I'll probably try implimenting it sometime this next week.

JRHockney*
01-21-2006, 04:34 PM
Agreed. Have any specific suggestions? Wait, tavion had an original stance for her style?!

I'll have to watch the movie saber battles again! lol. And tavion did have a special stance. It is the Blue stance in that Movie Stances 2.0 animation mod that I told you about. I also like the overhead stance substitution for red stance in this one. Its basically what anakin and dooku used in Episode II.


You mean like whil walking in basejka?

not sure, I haven't played base in a while! lol. Try playing MB2 and walk around hold block in different stances and you'll see what I mean.

Well, I'm willing to give it a shot. I'll probably try implimenting it sometime this next week.

Hooray!!! I think this will add some serious extra strategy to this system.

As for your other comments: I agree for the most part, but I do think at least the death from above red special should be much stronger or instant kill worthy. I mean come on, anyone can aviod that blatanly obvious move! LOL
Your other Ideas are good for the yellows and blue specials btw. But what about the back stab or rolling stab?

I have to get to work, so I respond around 7:00 tonight.

razorace
01-21-2006, 04:50 PM
I'm not sure about them yet. I'll have to think about it. However, I don't think DFA being a one shot kill is a good since it was really abused in the JKO days.

JRHockney*
01-21-2006, 09:49 PM
I'll try to think about it too. As far as the DFA is concerned, it was always a laughing matter when someone actually killed by it because its so easy too avoid, at least from my experience.

I wanted to write more but I'm still at work.

JRHockney*
01-22-2006, 02:42 AM
I was messing around with a couple of TABbots recently in FFA and I found some issues. I was fighting an anakin model who had duel sabers and set to J(edi Master level) and Plo-koonwho fought with blue style (and set to Initiate). Well....Plo-koon swing spammed us and best us first to 10 points!!! He was practically unparriable and even more so than anakin.

I'm sure that youre aware of the problems with duel sabers being hard to parry, but blue is actually worse as far as the TABbots are concerned.

In light of the fact that Tokakeke from MB may use Enhanced on his server for the weekends it might be a top priority to make all the saber styles balanced against each other in order to minimize complaints. My previous ideas about how to balance the system from a previous post might be a good way to start the balancing process. Here were some of them:

1. I think the freeze time caused by a successful parry or hit should be longer depending on the style that they where hit or parried with. Tavion and blue styles should cause a short freeze while red should cause the longest freeze. I've notice when I fought with red that if I parry someone, freeze ends long before I can finish my swing.

2. Make the block animation after doing a successful parry terminate quicker than it does. This often prevents a person who has done a parry from attacking the other person before the other person recovers from the parry they just recieved. I think this is also one of the reason way attacking is much more effective than parrying so far.

3. Make the faster styles do less DP damage. When I fight a Blue style tabbot and miss with a parry or get frozen from a hit, they swing spam and tear me to shreads very quickly. If they are going to stay that speed, they need some serious disadvantages. Red should still do the most damage, but not by much. If possible, staff should be weak but have more DP so it becomes a great weapon for fighting 2 or more people.

Plus:


Quote:
An interesting idea, we might have to try that. But is it logical to have the freeze times differ based on the defender's style or the attacker's style?


I've been debating this along time in my head and I think it should be based on the attackers style because they are the ones who need to follow up with a swing. Two Red style fighters would never get any hits on eachother after parrying if their freeze time was too short.

Quote:
As for the slow bounce times, I agree that they don't seem long enough in some cases, I think I'll make it a little be longer in the next release.


I'd be careful about this one. I would say that it might be better to work on making the parry animations shorter first so the parrying guy can swing faster. The knockaway animation might work better for this as you suggested. However, if you can't get this done or the attack style based slow bounces (the last idea) done before you make the next release, then its probably a good idea.

Quote:
I'm liking these ideas. But, again, should the DP costs be based on the defender's style or the attacker's style? Maybe both?


Again I had to think about this very hard. I would say both, in a way. DP damage should also be based on the attackers style here, however, different styles will have different DP gains. Staff should have the fastest DP gain and do light to moderate DP damage, thus, making it the best defensive weapon for fighting two or more people. Dual sabers would do maybe Moderate to high DP damage but have a slowest DP gain. Red would have a pretty fast DP gain and do the most DP damage while tavion style would have a fairly slow DP gain and do the least DP damage. Mind you, these differences would have to be fairly small in order to keep it balanced.


I'm glad you want to try the swinging power swing idea (which you may have to make the turns slower I think after playing with them for a while), however, for the sake of the future of Enhanced, it might be better to start the thought process of how you could balance the styles with no unfair advantages (like Initiate Plo-koon seemed to have).

Aside from the ones I listed above, do you have any other ideas or issues that I should think about?

Btw, I just had some ideas about what to do with roll-stab and backstab.

1. make them cause stuns (this may go for the other special moves too if you want).

2. make them do a more DP damage if you use them on a stunned person.

3. if you use them as a finishing move, youre saber will get stuck in them as they fall over and you'll have to retrieve it!!! LOL! Of course, given how hard it was to code the saber sticking in the wall thing, this might be a nightmare to code.

Vruki Salet
01-22-2006, 03:28 AM
...Ouch! Well, at least some people really liked the mod (probably about 10%)...

You underestimate. The players might be fickle but you're doing one heck of a service for other modders (like little ol me). Your additions and fixes are an invaluable base to build upon, thanks to your hard work and the open-sourceness of your project. Thanks Razorace!

razorace
01-23-2006, 02:20 AM
Well, I was looking into the meditation issue today and I noticed that the Fatigue code is set up to make FP not regen while a player is attacking with the saber. I'm sure this was done during the earlier stages of the Fatigue system and I suspect that it's not nessicary anymore. Plus, removing it might help a bit with the complains about FP "never" regenning. What do you guys think?

razorace
01-23-2006, 03:40 AM
As per your earlier question on the server, yes, it looks like we can make new stances for the new styles since the single saber animations already just a generic start position for all their swings.

Vruki Salet
01-23-2006, 04:05 AM
...the Fatigue code is set up to make FP not regen while a player is attacking with the saber. ...removing it might help a bit with the complains about FP "never" regenning. What do you guys think?

I think it should regen fine until several swings have gone on in a row - fewer if it's the same swing over and over. Then a break for a few seconds sets the regen on again. That might discourage attack spamming and constant button smashing.

JRHockney*
01-23-2006, 04:09 AM
Well, I was looking into the meditation issue today and I noticed that the Fatigue code is set up to make FP not regen while a player is attacking with the saber. I'm sure this was done during the earlier stages of the Fatigue system and I suspect that it's not nessicary anymore. Plus, removing it might help a bit with the complains about FP "never" regenning. What do you guys think?

I'm not sure if I understand. You mean remove the FP drain from attacking all together? If thats what you mean, I would say no because that will give eventual swing spammers a free ride without conservation, especially after they learn how to fake. I'm probably misunderstanding you though. I'm still in favor of making the FP gain go up a little faster though.

Another alternative is my old anti-gunner toggle idea slightly modified. It's not neccarily an "anti-gunner" toggle but more of a force user toggle:

As far as saberists dealing with gunners, I might also suggest making an anti-gunner saber key that allows saberists to run and attack without stopping or using force power. The catch with this would be if when using this anti-gunner saber style, if a saber hits you or you hit a saber with your saber, you get disarmed!


If you were to make it so while in anti-gunner mode you gained FP at default rate. It would make it still hard to gain FP in a saber fight, but it would allow for faster gain while not saber fighting and would help jedi to keep some force after swating at a gunner or jumping or forcepower that normally drains FP and leaves you reserveless for a saber fight. I'm also worried that no one will ever use force powers because they are too FP draining and too slow to recover, so this might be a fix to that. There might have to be a slight delay on the toggle though so people in saber fights cant spam it too much to gain FP.

Btw, the reason I asked about taking out the spin swing and only allow it with a button command (may question the server tonight) is because with the risky but powerful turning swings idea, I'm a little worried that in this fast paced saber combat, they might become a little too difficult to avoid doing and getting hit while doing it. And remember, that risky but powerful turning swing idea should only work for yellow, red, and maybe desanns.

Anyway, good luck with studying tonight.

JRHockney*
01-23-2006, 04:17 AM
I think it should regen fine until several swings have gone on in a row - fewer if it's the same swing over and over. Then a break for a few seconds sets the regen on again. That might discourage attack spamming and constant button smashing.

Or maybe what Vruki Salet said. lol

razorace
01-23-2006, 04:59 AM
Ok, to clarify, I'm referring to the regeneration of FP during attacks, not the drain that attacking does to FP. Basically, right now, players don't regen FP at all while attacking and I'm thinking that that might be a bit much. Also, we might want to remove the walk = 1/2 regen...

Not that I don't like the swing spam -> FP drain idea, it's just that I don't think we need to discourage swinging at this point with our current back/forth action.

JRHockney*
01-23-2006, 05:31 AM
Ok, to clarify, I'm referring to the regeneration of FP during attacks, not the drain that attacking does to FP. Basically, right now, players don't regen FP at all while attacking and I'm thinking that that might be a bit much. Also, we might want to remove the walk = 1/2 regen...

Not that I don't like the swing spam -> FP drain idea, it's just that I don't think we need to discourage swinging at this point with our current back/forth action.

OK, thats fine as long as it doesn't lead to excessive swing spam, I'm all for the solid back and forth action we have going for us. I kind of like the pace we were moving at tonight though and I think Vruki Salet's idea might help with actieving a good balance to keep that pace. Maybe make FP penalies for excessive comboing like maybe 10 fp for every 4+ moves comboed together or something like that. Maybe we could make the penalty much more severe depending on the speed of the saber style used too and that would help balance the styles!

Removing the walking = 1/2 fp regain might be a good idea as long as running is still penalized the way it is now.

Ok, I'm tired and bummed about the Broncos (very sad game). Goodnight.

JRHockney*
01-25-2006, 10:09 PM
I'm probably jumping the gun on this question but aside from bug fixes, will there be any other features that you are adding for sure this time around, other than the FP not regen while a player is attacking with the saber. I'm sure youre probably already as busy as I am with your semester so its totally cool if its only mostly some much needed bug fixes. Any new base stances this time around?

Also, if you want to test any features before you release the next beta, I'm more than willing to help with the testing if you need it.

razorace
01-26-2006, 02:45 AM
Mainly just bug fixes at this point. Probably the biggest change is that I'm retooling the viewlocking feature since it doesn't really work right yet.

JRHockney*
01-26-2006, 03:32 AM
Mainly just bug fixes at this point. Probably the biggest change is that I'm retooling the viewlocking feature since it doesn't really work right yet.

Thats cool. Is this gonna be v.0.0.6 or v0.0.5b2 or something like that? Well, do what ever you have time for. Hopefully the parrying system will work perfectly this time around without the "multi directional back (s key) parrying."

One thing you might want to consider if you have time to do it is: slowing down blue and tavion (and maybe yellow slightly) styles a little more. This might be a quicker compromise in style balancing at least until a more complex saber style balancing system can be put into place. it might also help those styles look like less of a flurry in saber combat and more cinematic.

razorace
01-26-2006, 04:05 AM
I'm probably going to call it 0.0.6.

As for the swing speeds, I'll look into the actual animations (especially the wind ups) to see what we can do about balancing them. I'd rather not slow anything down if I don't have to since this was a HUGE complaint point about the earlier versions of the mod.

JRHockney*
01-26-2006, 05:38 AM
I just had a few of my crazy ideas!! They can be used independently of eachother if only one of thems good too.

1. Targeting your enemy prevents or decreases FP drain while attacking

2. Targeting your enemy while walking increases attack power DP hit wise (or maybe its normal and not targeting is less)

3. In order for your dodge to activate when needed, you have to be Targeting your enemy (however, back kills will only kill if the attacker is walking)

4. In order to do a successful parry, you also have to be targeting your enemy (however; pressing the right parry direction will still prevent DP loss if your not targeting them).

Yep, that alot of targeting! But it might add some more depth, skill, and strategy to this saber system.

razorace
01-26-2006, 02:44 PM
I remember this whole arguement coming up during the Promod era.

Basically, I don't beleive that a person's ability to aim or more realistically, be a LPB, should be a major contributing factor in their game performance. However, you do bring up a good point that certain activities require more effort based on weither or not you're able to see the other guy.

As such, I'd probably be willing to try something like you're suggestion but be based on much more broad fields of vision requirements. IE, something like DP costs go up if you're not able to see your oppenent while dodging.

JRHockney*
01-26-2006, 05:22 PM
I should be clear that I am not trying to turn this system into promod bya any means. I've read about it, but it basically died before I ever started playing JK at all.

While I dont know much about the old debates on this topic, I don't see why targeting benefits would be such an issue. This is still a first/third person game and most people who play have play first person shooters before where aiming is everything. Also, If we make it so it can only have any effect when the attacker or the parrier is walking, it really wouldn't be that hard I think. Although this would give first person view a bigger advantage.

Anyway...

As such, I'd probably be willing to try something like you're suggestion but be based on much more broad fields of vision requirements. IE, something like DP costs go up if you're not able to see your oppenent while dodging.

Yeah that would be cool and more realistic.

JRHockney*
01-28-2006, 02:28 AM
I have two questions and a idea.
Questions:

1. Since Enhanced didn't come out today, are you waiting a week so you have more time to do stuff to it or is it going to be released like tomarrow or something (or are you just to busy to worry about it at the moment which is understandable).

2. Is it possible to make the bounding box bigger to where the block is and maybe make the block activation area even further out, and if so, what problems might arise from this. The only reason I what to know this and whether its a good idea is because it might help stop the sabers from going through people when they are not suppose to. I was watching espisode III last night and I noticed they seem to always go back and forth between attacking and blocking. If this is possible, if we put a slight delay on a blocked followup attack for the person who just had their attack blocked (but nearly as much as a parry though) it might lead to movie like back and forth attacking and blocking by both saberists. A bigger block detention range might also help to determine who swung first. There should be no blocking detention from behind obviously (although having a manual back blocking function might be cool, but you would need a new animation for it)

Idea:

4. In order to do a successful parry, you also have to be targeting your enemy (however; pressing the right parry direction will still prevent DP loss if your not targeting them).

Yeah ok I've already posted this one, but I think its worthy of consideration on its own. I can see why you didn't like the other ones, but this would not be too hard to do with walking attackers and it would distinguish a no DP costing block to a parry. Making the parrying a little harder to do might be an interesting change as well.

razorace
01-28-2006, 04:17 AM
I have no idea when the next version of Enhanced will be posted. I still need to finish the viewlock revision but I just haven't had the time.

As for the blocking range, I can expand it but we have to be very careful since too large of a block area would result in players being unfairly interrupted into a block when it wouldn't be approprate. From what I can tell, the problem seems to be the bloody server frame rate rather than a weakness/delay in the hit detection.

razorace
01-28-2006, 06:51 AM
Well, I got the viewlock working. I'm not sure it's working perfectly yet, but it does seem to be doing what it's supposed to do. Basically, it prevent players from moving or yawing their blades thru other player's sabers. It also adds a tactile "impact" to saber impacts.

It's technically been in the system for sometime now, however, I could never get it to work good in my earlier attempts so it wasn't noticable until now.

JRHockney*
01-28-2006, 03:27 PM
Well, I got the viewlock working. I'm not sure it's working perfectly yet, but it does seem to be doing what it's supposed to do. Basically, it prevent players from moving or yawing their blades thru other player's sabers. It also adds a tactile "impact" to saber impacts.


Cool! That should help alot. Hopefully people will like it. I look forward to trying it out.

As for the blocking range, I can expand it but we have to be very careful since too large of a block area would result in players being unfairly interrupted into a block when it wouldn't be approprate. From what I can tell, the problem seems to be the bloody server frame rate rather than a weakness/delay in the hit detection.

I might be an interesting experiment. You might want to test it out before you attempt a release of it though. I can see why this would be a risk, so if you decide to do it, just use your best judgement.

Btw, what country/state do you live in? You seem to anwser in the middle of the night where I'm at! LOL

razorace
01-28-2006, 04:31 PM
I'm in the Pacific time zone. Idaho to be more specific.

JRHockney*
01-28-2006, 10:04 PM
Wow you work late! I'm in Colorado.

Anyways, I just thought of an interesting suggestion that might help solve the "sabers still going through people" problem during the back and forth action:

While walking, the saber swing stops a little more that half way between pointing to the side at a 90 degree angle and pointing directly at the opponent (maybe around 160 degrees or so). In order to do a full swing, you would have to be running (thus still making them useful against gunners or when a person is stunned). This may mean that you might have to make the bounding box a little bigger to still allow for collisons though. Doing a full swing against a person might have to have some kind of a penalty if the opponent is not stunned, but I'm not sure what yet.

Its an idea, but I haven't thought it out too well yet so let me know if you see any problems with it.

razorace
01-28-2006, 10:22 PM
I'm not sure that's realistic or really doable since the animations are only set up for full swings.

Tokakeke
01-29-2006, 01:15 PM
I'm in the Pacific time zone. Idaho to be more specific.

Wow, where in Idaho? I live in Spokane (near the Wash-Idaho border)

JRHockney*
01-29-2006, 04:12 PM
Spokane is a nice town. I stayed there once for a day several years ago at a hotel in the down town area and played Lasertag at a really hightech (well, more than normal) laser tag place. Than it was on to Seattle. I hope the Sea Hawks destory the Steelers after what they did to us! LOL!

I'm not sure that's realistic or really doable since the animations are only set up for full swings.

Yeah. Oh well, back to the drawing board. I do still kind of like the idea about rising the bounding box a bit and the block detection as an experiement. Even if it does make people switch to block unintentionally at a realy close range, it might help them to learn to keep their distance. Of course I'm not sure how this would effect the faster saber styles with shorter range. They may have to be confincated for if it becomes a problem for them.

I also might suggest (if it hasn't already been done) that you make kicking do no DP damage until they are at 50% DP because there should be no avantage to it aside from being able to swing at people while they are on the ground. If kicking still does a ton of DP damage, I fear this will lead to too much kicking and not enough back and forth action with the sabers.

razorace
01-29-2006, 07:28 PM
Well, I'll play around with the saber block protection radius when I install Keshire's block animations.

As for kicking, I'm not sure if there is a large DP cost for dodging it. But you're right, it needs to be balanced properly. I think the balance is supposed to be that you can't saber block while in a kick.

FYI, I'm sick at the moment so I'm not sure how much work I'll get done for a while.

JRHockney*
01-29-2006, 07:46 PM
As for kicking, I'm not sure if there is a large DP cost for dodging it. But you're right, it needs to be balanced properly. I think the balance is supposed to be that you can't saber block while in a kick.

FYI, I'm sick at the moment so I'm not sure how much work I'll get done for a while.

We'll have to test that the next time we're both online. If it does do a lot of DP damage to kick a over 50 DP stun, than it might have to change for balance sake. At the moment, it is pretty easy to kick one of those.

Anyways, sorry to hear about your sickness. I won't bug you for a while so you can get well. I'll add you to my prayer list or something. Drink lots of tea if your sickness permits it.

razorace
01-29-2006, 08:24 PM
FYI, kicks do FP damage, not DP, to stunned players.

JRHockney*
01-30-2006, 01:32 AM
FP?! Hmmm, that might not be as much of a problem then. I'll have to think about it from that perspective then and analyze any potential problems with that if their are any (which I can't think of any at the moment). Anyways, good luck getting unsick. :barf:

Vruki Salet
01-30-2006, 08:22 AM
Yeah Razor. Take it easy & get well.

JRHockney*
02-01-2006, 10:55 PM
Hey Razor, I'm not sure how much better you're feeling, but I thought I'd throw down a relatively uncomplex idea before I forget it:

While two people are swinging, if one of them gets hit first and they press the correct parry direction as the saber hits them or enters their block detection range, the person blocking will not lose DP but they will not parry it. Parrying will only happen if the person doing the parrying was not swinging when he got hit.

I figure that this might help make two people swinging at each other use strategy in their movement rather than just spamming with their swinging.

That's it for now. Hope your feeling better and thanks for adding that very useful server tracker thing.

razorace
02-02-2006, 02:16 AM
Nope, still under the weather. I've been told that I might be this way until the end of the week.

As for attack-on-attack impacts, there's no DP cost as is. However, it does mean that the players have to successfully touch their sabers together.

JRHockney*
02-02-2006, 02:38 AM
Nope, still under the weather. I've been told that I might be this way until the end of the week.

As for attack-on-attack impacts, there's no DP cost as is. However, it does mean that the players have to successfully touch their sabers together.

Aww man. Poor Razor. You don't have the bird flu or something do you?! That would really suck. Anyway, good luck with getting well. I hope it has at least lightened up a bit.

As far as my idea is concern, I actually meant when you get hit first while swinging and parry your opponent. I noticed that I've been able to do this with the Tabbots and they seemed to get completely parried. I don't know, maybe its fine the way it is. I'll keep thinking about some logical possibilities.

razorace
02-02-2006, 03:49 AM
It's just the flu. :)

Well, that's probably occuring since there are slight mishap possibilities even in attack-on-attack impacts. I'd rather not add a directional block to that sort of situation since it would make pure blocking seem pretty pointless or that least that's what I'd be concerned about.

JRHockney*
02-02-2006, 03:51 PM
It's just the flu. :)

Well, that's probably occuring since there are slight mishap possibilities even in attack-on-attack impacts. I'd rather not add a directional block to that sort of situation since it would make pure blocking seem pretty pointless or that least that's what I'd be concerned about.

I'm glad its nothing too serious. Anyway...

I see your concern, however the way I had envisioned this is that autoblocking would still happen regardless of whether or not you were pushing the proper parry direction. Getting hit first in an attack on attack situation would still drain your DP if you weren't pressing the proper parry direction, but pressing the proper parry direction in this situation would cause you no DP loss. The trade off is that: if you were attacking when you got hit first adn you press the proper parry direction, your opponent won't get parried. You have to not be attacking in order to actually parry an opponent.

Although I'm still not sure if this is a good idea. While it might add some strategy and technique to full on attacking, it might also change the combat a little too much in favor of swinging, so I'm not sure myself. It might be an interesting experiement though. Anyways, it's something to think about. I'm sure there would be issues with it that I haven't thought of yet.

razorace
02-02-2006, 05:03 PM
So, basically, you're just suggesting that a player shouldn't be able to parry if they're forced into a block while attacking, right?

JRHockney*
02-02-2006, 05:43 PM
So, basically, you're just suggesting that a player shouldn't be able to parry if they're forced into a block while attacking, right?

Basically yes, but if they do press the right parry direction at such a time, they will lose no DP. This just prevents them from stunning their opponent with a parry in such a situation. It turns what would normally be a parry into a swingblock that costs no DP.

Like I said before, I'm still not sure if this is a good idea or not.

JRHockney*
02-04-2006, 10:15 PM
Just a couple things:

1. I was wondering if it would be possible to have the TABbots still gain a little FP while running because they always seem to run out of steam just when our duals are getting good. Although I'm not sure if this problem will get fixed by something you already have planned for the next release.

2. I had an idea about having it so that you gain 50 FP and to bars of DP when ever you kill somebody. This might help make fighting two people a little easier and prevent anyone from getting slaughtered by someone else right after they just barely defeat someone else. Good idea?

3. Any word on the next realise of Enhanced and what it will have thats new? including bug fixes and other stuff? And hows your health btw?

Lathain Valtiel
02-05-2006, 01:34 AM
I should be clear that I am not trying to turn this system into promod bya any means. I've read about it, but it basically died before I ever started playing JK at all.

It's a shame actually, as you missed some of the greatest straight up FFAs in Jedi Outcast or Academy. For almost every single night of its lifetime, ArtifeX's server was packed by both Jedi and gun-using badasses. That and firing rockets in close quarters was actually DANGEROUS to whoever fired it... especially if said rocket was Level 4. It also had balanced jetpacks that put those in Academy to SHAME.

The saber fights were beyond excellent, and for once Lightside wasn't a horrific handicap in 1v1 duel since Heal was buffed a bit and Drain was slightly less badass.

razorace
02-05-2006, 04:13 AM
1. I was wondering if it would be possible to have the TABbots still gain a little FP while running because they always seem to run out of steam just when our duals are getting good.
I'm not sure about this one. The 1st priority with the bots is that they don't have an unfair advantage over the human players. We'll just have to live with it until I can improve the bots some more.
2. I had an idea about having it so that you gain 50 FP and to bars of DP when ever you kill somebody.
I'd really prefer not to award players in such a way since that would be very unrealistic. However, maybe it would be wise if we just reduced the total amount of DP a player has since it seems to me that DP deaths are pretty rare at the moment.
3. Any word on the next realise of Enhanced and what it will have thats new? including bug fixes and other stuff? And hows your health btw?
I'm feeling better but I do have to get caught up on my school work. Hopefully I'll be able to release something so. I just finished a Basic release today so that should indicate good progress. :)

JRHockney*
02-05-2006, 05:53 AM
The saber fights were beyond excellent, and for once Lightside wasn't a horrific handicap in 1v1 duel since Heal was buffed a bit and Drain was slightly less badass.

Yeah, I've heard alot about how good it was. I really wish I was around to ry it out at it's prime.


I'd really prefer not to award players in such a way since that would be very unrealistic. However, maybe it would be wise if we just reduced the total amount of DP a player has since it seems to me that DP deaths are pretty rare at the moment.

Probably a good idea.

Along those lines I do still think that the saberstyles should do slightly different DP damages, maybe like in my old idea about the styles. I also think that something needs to be done with the special moves such as either making them all cause stuns or making some of them instant kill moves that cost a TON of FP and leave the attacker vulnerable. Anything to make them have a use in this system. It might be good to make them cause stuns for the next release because It would probably be easy to do (I think) and it could be a temporary edition to the system if you don't like it. It might add some wholeness and some eye candy to the system too. Because they cost FP, they probably wouldn't be overused either.

I'm feeling better but I do have to get caught up on my school work. Hopefully I'll be able to release something so. I just finished a Basic release today so that should indicate good progress.

Good to hear youre feeling better. Good job on making a new basic (even though I still refuse to play it because of the base saber combat! LOL :p) I hope you don't have too much school work to catch up on.

The Antilles
02-06-2006, 12:55 PM
for some reason my quote is not working so "Along those lines I do still think that the saberstyles should do slightly different DP damages, maybe like in my old idea about the styles. I also think that something needs to be done with the special moves such as either making them all cause stuns or making some of them instant kill moves that cost a TON of FP and leave the attacker vulnerable. Anything to make them have a use in this system. It might be good to make them cause stuns for the next release because It would probably be easy to do (I think) and it could be a temporary edition to the system if you don't like it. It might add some wholeness and some eye candy to the system too. Because they cost FP, they probably wouldn't be overused either"

I fully Agree with this idea. Also thanks for the basic update, And I'm glad your over the flu. So get your school work done slaker!!!!!

razorace
02-06-2006, 05:23 PM
Yeah, yeah, yeah. :) I'll work on my school work.

JRHockney*
02-06-2006, 09:28 PM
I fully Agree with this idea. Also thanks for the basic update, And I'm glad your over the flu. So get your school work done slaker!!!!!

I'm glad you like this idea. Although I did just notice that special moves only use 4 FP. This might need to be increased a bit (maybe 8-10 FP) to make them less used or spammed. It might also be cool to have the special moves (including the rollstab) kill the opponent when they get Long stunned at below 50 DP but only if they hit perfectly or something.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. I'll work on my school work

Yeah, me too! :p I look forward to trying out Enhanced 0.0.6...... when class is over!

JRHockney*
02-08-2006, 02:22 AM
Great improvements on this version of enhanced. I especially like the new stances and the new walking. Also great work on the saberthrow and not penalizing blocking with FP pauses.

There is still one thing that desperately needs fixing though more than anything. That is: Something has to be done about blue style!! I fought Plo-koon again (the freak Tabbot that uses Blue) and he still tore me to streads until I started swing spamming him with blue aswell. I decided to watch my DP meter as I fought him strictly defensively and even when I moved perfectly into his swing, I still lost nearly 1 and 1/2 full bars of DP at least 2/3 of the time and only parried him about 1/6 of the time! Any bot I swing spammed with blue no matter what style I were using (except blue) I tore to shreads very quickly as well.

I'm not sure why this happening but the blue style strikes do seem to spend longer inside the opponents defenses longer then any other style. If you would like to get together an test this out again, let me know here or on the scheduling thread.

Btw, I did just have an interesting Idea for saber style diversity. This idea comes from when I use to fight in Tae Know Do tournaments years ago and shorter opponents use to get really close to me to make me unable to kick them. The idea is this:

Basically, all styles have "sweet spot" ranges to them. Too close will do no damage and too far will do less damage. The styles would differ something like this:

Tavion and blue would have a very small sweet spot in the middle of their saber and do very little damage further up.

Yellow would have a medium size sweet spot in the middle and do marginal damage further up.

Desann have a large sweet spot in the middle and do marginal damage further up.

Red Would do full damage from the middle of the saber to the tip.

I think this idea would help players not to get too close to eachother and allow for some strategy in positioning.

razorace
02-08-2006, 02:57 AM
Unfortunately, I'm not sure we can impliment the range idea accurately enough to make it fair/fun for the players.

As for blue, I'll double-check blue's animation speed compared to the other styles.

JRHockney*
02-08-2006, 04:05 AM
Unfortunately, I'm not sure we can impliment the range idea accurately enough to make it fair/fun for the players.


Hmmm, that's a good point. Because players are always moving it might end up being more frustrating than anything if the "sweet spot" is to small or too particular. Maybe if we combined a similar but larger and less particular version of this idea with the a style varying DP damage idea maybe like one of the ones I written before, it might balance itself out without being frustrating. I still especially like the idea of no damage being done at too close of a range and making the faster styles require more acquiracy somehow.

As far as blue style is concerned, if worse comes to worse and you can't figure out a way to balance it through the animations to where it is more parryable, I think Vruki's old idea about penalizing several swings in a row with a ton of FP might help resolve this issue a bit.

razorace
02-08-2006, 04:08 AM
Well, I looked into it a bit and it looks like the actual attack animations are a bit faster than the yellow style. I slowed just the attack animation speed by 20% and that appears to have helped the problem.

JRHockney*
02-08-2006, 04:36 AM
Well, I looked into it a bit and it looks like the actual attack animations are a bit faster than the yellow style. I slowed just the attack animation speed by 20% and that appears to have helped the problem.

Great! I don't suppose you could make a patch or something like that for 0.0.6 could you? It might be nice to destroy that problem while this version is still new so people aren't wondering why they keep killing everything with blue. Although I haven't seen too many problems when using tavions style, it might be a good idea to check that one too.

razorace
02-08-2006, 03:53 PM
mmm, it would be too much of a hassle to do. It will just be in the next version.

JRHockney*
02-09-2006, 01:36 AM
I've been brainstorming several very large ideas for the sabersystem that I think would make it reach its greatest potential as a truly superior sabersystem to anything available.

One of the biggest strengths of the base sabersystem was its sheer variety of ways to go about attacking and this is what is currently lacking in this system. Eventhough the back and forth action awsome in this system, it still has its limits because you learn to know what to expect. If we can come up with more variety and unique characteristics to all the styles. I have come up with a possible plan of how to do this.

First off, before reading about the change to the individual styles, a few things need to be changed in order to make these ideas balanced:

1. Parrying for most styles costs a little DP, like it did in 0.0.4. Perfect blocking (that costs no FP or DP) by DP costing parrying styles can be done by faking into the opponents on coming saber as it can right now.

2.The special moves cause regular stuns and have the following characteristics: Roll stab and Blue uppercut do 25% DP damage and cost 10 FP, Yellow overheadslash does 50% DP and costs 20 FP, Red leap slash does 100% DP damage causing death in most cases and costs 30-40 FP (lets face it, only noobs will be hit by this for the most part). However, special attacks will only do half their normal damage if they hit someone who is in a 50+ DP stun.

3. Each additional chained slash will cost 10 FP after 2 slashes for tavion and blue and 3 for yellow and red (I'll esplain desann's change in the next section)

4. Hits to the back 180 degrees of an opponent will cause 50% DP damage.


Ok, Now for the individual characteristics of the styles:

Tavion: The fastest style which will do the weakest DP damage by default, but will do Yellows amount of damage if the opponent is targeted when hit. Roll stab will do 50% Dp damage with this style as well. These changes are to make this the perfect fencer's style and get the old promod fans a style of their own (they will love you for it!!! LOL).

Blue: Does more DP damage than not targeting with tavion but less damage than yellow. This style, however, will have its FP jumping drain reduced by 75% or more, thus making it like yoda's style. Back hitting is the key to this style, which will be hard to do against bots sadly.

Yellow: Moderate DP damage given. No FP penalties for preforming fakes and no DP penalties for parrying. Obiwan like Balance is the key to this style

Desann: Does the same damage as yellow, but is endlessly chainable in swings without the large FP costs of the other styles. Swings still cost 1 FP though. Agression is the key to both offense and defense in this style

Red: Highest DP damage and no penalties for parrying. The slowest but most powerful Anakin/Sidious like style.

I'm still not sure about Staff and Dual yet other than staff being the best defensive wise and duel the best offensive wise.

Well there it is, my most complex but hopefully balanced and benefitial idea set yet. If anything, I hope it will give you an idea of what direction to take this system next.

Question: Did you ever find out if turning swings can be eliminated or not. I ask this because I'm pretty sure my old more powerful but more risky turn swing idea will only work with our current system if a button is pressed to activate them, otherwise people will be doing them by accident too often.

razorace
02-09-2006, 03:13 AM
I looked into the transitions stuff and there simply aren't the animations nessicary to pull out the spin moves without seriously hampering the moves that a player can make.

Thank you for making an attempt at quantifying the differences between the styles. :) Hopefully this will finally get the ball rolling. However, I do have some issues with some of your suggestions.

1. I don't think a swing chaining limit is nessicary since players can already reverse the tables pretty easily by simply parrying one of the attacks. Adding in a increasing FP drain would only drive newbies away from the game.

2. The FP jump reduction for Blue is an interesting idea, but not a realistic one. I don't want to grant magical abilities based on whatever style the player is using. Style differences really need to just be saber combat related and hopefully something that make logical sense.

For example, I think any move in any stance where the player is holding the saber with one hand should have a very large disarm penalty since two handed grips are much better than one handed ones. Ideally this penalty would be carefully tuned to the individual animations but I might just have it be based on style for starters.

3. I'm still musing about the special moves. Your suggestions are good ones, but I'm really worried that the special moves would be totally spammable. The best that I can come up with so far is that a blocked special would automatically result in a stun. Maybe specials should just cause different mishaps in the defender based on their FP/DP status. For example,

Blue Lunge:
A blue lunge is seen in the movies to be a disarming move. It should cost double DP to saber block and cost 3 FP to the attacker. If the defender is hit while stunned, it costs double the normal Body Dodge cost. If the player doesn't have the DP or if they're fatigued, the player automatically loses their saber hand and dies.

4. All the saber damage is lethal. As such, we can't really tweak saber damage levels since they are all lethal to start with.

Anyway, I'm running out of musing steam and I have some homework so I'll call it quits for now. Thanks for the stimulating debate. :)

JRHockney*
02-09-2006, 04:44 PM
1. Hmm, I'm not sure I entirely agree that it would drive newbies away from the game penalizing combo swings over 2 or 3 moves is actually very generous compared to movie battles2 where the it can cost around 10% BP or more to swing twice in a row. This suggestion was more meant to help keep the faster styles from spamming than anything. Maybe those limits or something similar could be just for them.

2. Agree that maybe the one handed styles should have a disarm penalty, but I don't think the Jumping idea is entirely unrealistic. Sure, its not real life like, but it is movie like. Yoda and episode 1 Obiwan used it, so why not have a style that promotes a little more jumping. How about as a compromise, Back flips and side flips are not penalized. It would also be neat if the lowest jump (which still goes over peoples heads) went into a flip with this style.

3. more to be added later, I have to go

razorace
02-09-2006, 04:59 PM
Looks like we both had a little time at the same time. :)

1. I just don't agree with that. FP costs are high enough without adding combo penalties. Besides, the back/forth action should prevent the possibility in the first place.

2. I'm not against having special moves associated with each style, but I don't agree that certain styles should get physical bonuses/penalties to things over than saber combat. For example, the fact that players can't roll out of a fall without having the saber out has been something that I've heard complains about.

3. As for the DFA move, I'm thinking that it should probably cause DP damage and knockdown unless the defender parries. In addition, I think that the attacker should have to be running forward to be able to launch into a DFA. What do you think?

4. As for the yellow overhead jump, I keep thinking that it's primarily a evasive move to get on the other side of the defender. It's primary function is that it's a jump move that doesn't make the player lose block/Dodge protection. We might be able to get away with a small DP smash on the defender as well, but I think this move is mainly about manovering around.

5. Anyway, I really hope Tokeke gets his server back up soon. I'd really like to try the lastest release against other human players. I saw another Enhanced server up last night but it had a password on it.

6. Number lists are fun! :)

JRHockney*
02-09-2006, 06:21 PM
I'm back with some time. Go, go, gadget number lists!!!

1. Ok, if you are set on not penalizing too many multiple combo swings, than thats fin; however, if it turns out that after what ever adjustments you make, noobs can still swing spam the faster styles and win, you might want to reconsider.

2. The point of making jumping cost less with blue is mainly to help promote a different fighting style with that blue in general, but as a unique characteristic, I suppose having the blue uppercut would be enough. If it is still going to be faster than yellow, it should do a little less DP damage though. For all the styles, I would like to see backflip and cartwheel penalized less FP wise (10 FP is way too much) though, and maybe the lowest jump go into a fli if possible. They are too dangerous to use too often anyway.

3. I don't think they would be spammable if they cost too much FP to use or maybe allow the attacker to get stunned if he misses and hit on the landing. FP can become a rarety in combat and spamming the special moves would not be realistic for anyone who knows how to fight with this system.
Your ideas are for yellow overhead slash and DFA are pretty good too. Yellow overhead slash should do at least a little DP damage because its one of the coolest moves in the game.

As for you blue lunge idea, I think that might make it alittle overpowered to only use 3 FP and cause so much damage. I personally think should cost no less than 10 FP or maybe 15, disarm and do alot of DP damage if the person isn't stunned, do a little less DP damage if the person is stunned at 50+ DP, and do a ton of damage or kill like you suggested if the person is in a 50- DP stun.

4. Yellow overhead slash should do at least a little DP damage because its one of the coolest moves in the game. The Evasion is a good idea too.

5. I think rolling stab should cost a least 10 FP, do significant DP damage, and maybe knock the opponent over.

6. What do you think about my Promod like suggestions for tavions style? I think it's a good idea and I still think that rolling stab with tavion style should do more DP damage than regular. Remember the theatrics mod and how each swing of its tavions style stopped in the middle and did a stab move? That might also be cool to see done even thought the animations arent perfect.

7. Desanns style needs something original I think, maybe an up close grapple move that causes some DP damage and knocks them over. You could use the last hit of the malee grap punch kata animation and have the saber still turned on in the punchers hand.

4. All the saber damage is lethal. As such, we can't really tweak saber damage levels since they are all lethal to start with.

Whenever I say the word "damage," it usually means I forgot to say DP in front of it! lol :p . Anyways, I still think the saber styles need to vary in the DP damages their swings (But not by much!!!) And hopefully if you use my suggestion for tavion's style, it will be the only mutant style of the bunch with to damage possibilities.

Btw, is it possible to speed up the malee grap kata just a bit? I would be cool if doing a kata grap between saber swings was a little more possible for pure maleers. I'm sure that MB people like Shawn Za'an would love you for it. I like to do it once in a while as well.

If Tokakeke gets his server up tonight, I'll put a time to meet down on the scheduling thread if you want to test stuff.

Also, Have you tried putting the new Enhanced on pcgamemds today yet? There are a few new entires.

razorace
02-09-2006, 10:19 PM
2. I'll consider reducing the backflip/cartwheel/jump FP costs.

6. I don't remember the theatrics mod, sorry.

7. Actually, there's a different, unused fancy DFA animation that isn't used. I might just add that DFA as the Desann style's special move.

8. I don't know about speeding up the grapple move as it could very well unbalance things. There's not exactly much disadvantage to the grapple other than gap in saber block.

razorace
02-09-2006, 10:31 PM
9. Oh yeah, I'm considering redoing the mishap internals to simpify them. I'm considering removing the more subtle mishaps like ones that occur in attack-on-attack impacts and just making mishaps only happen when the players do something specific. It would make things easier to modify and understand. Yes, we would loss all the subtle random events but my experience has been that random mishaps like that just cause confusion.

JRHockney*
02-09-2006, 11:13 PM
6. I don't remember the theatrics mod, sorry.

Thats this one: http://www.pcgamemods.com/mod/13578.html Its only for forcemod3 but tavions style is pure fencing in it and the concept of making the swings end with the stab animation is an interesting concept.

7. Actually, there's a different, unused fancy DFA animation that isn't used. I might just add that DFA as the Desann style's special move.

:drop2: Cool, I look forward to seeing it in action. Is it used in JA+ or something? Does that mean you like the idea of making tavions roll stab stronger or the promod like idea for uniqueness sake, or do you have something else planned?

8. I don't know about speeding up the grapple move as it could very well unbalance things. There's not exactly much disadvantage to the grapple other than gap in saber block.

Yeah, I know. I just wish there could be a way to delay the dodge a bit or maybe allow the grap to still take place like 20 milisecs into the dodge or something.

9. Oh yeah, I'm considering redoing the mishap internals to simpify them. I'm considering removing the more subtle mishaps like ones that occur in attack-on-attack impacts and just making mishaps only happen when the players do something specific. It would make things easier to modify and understand. Yes, we would loss all the subtle random events but my experience has been that random mishaps like that just cause confusion.

Great idea! Any idea how though? Should I be brainstorming able this too?

razorace
02-10-2006, 12:14 AM
Cool, I look forward to seeing it in action.
It might have been in JA+ but I'm not sure. Its basically a spin attack version of the DFA.

Great idea! Any idea how though? Should I be brainstorming able this too?
I'm open to suggestions. :) The major issues are what the base mishap probabilities should be and how the probabilities should change for based on the skill level of duelers. I've been really struggling to figure out what to do about the differences in skill level.

Recently, I've been thinking that it might be easiest for players if the balancing between saber skill levels might just be done with the amount of FP/DP the players get.

JRHockney*
02-10-2006, 01:16 AM
I'm open to suggestions. The major issues are what the base mishap probabilities should be and how the probabilities should change for based on the skill level of duelers. I've been really struggling to figure out what to do about the differences in skill level.

Recently, I've been thinking that it might be easiest for players if the balancing between saber skill levels might just be done with the amount of FP/DP the players get.

I think making it DP/FP based is definitely the easiest way unless you wanted to do something really complicated like make a counter that keeps track of parries, successful attacks, or whatever and resents after your opponent is dead or one minute of no action or something.

I do have some FP/DP related suggestions to this though. For one handed styles, keep disarms mishaps random after 50- FP. After 50%- DP and 35- FP or so, make it so that all styles get disarmed if they are kick while they are in a stun (kind of like Darth Sidious was in Episode 3). Everything other mishap 50- FP for two handed styles should be knock downs. Blue Lunge should also disarm in the way I suggested above! :laughing:

razorace
02-10-2006, 02:26 AM
So, you're suggesting that two-handed styles should just knockdown instead of disarm?

JRHockney*
02-10-2006, 03:17 AM
So, you're suggesting that two-handed styles should just knockdown instead of disarm?

Yes, in a below 50 FP stituation (unless they get kicked while in stun which will disarm them when below 35 or maybe 40 FP).

One handed styles will randomly get either knockdown or disarm below 50 FP, and just disarmed if they get kicked while stunned when below 35 or maybe 40 FP. And like I said, getting kicked in a below 50% DP stun would also disarm.

Basically, this idea adds the "certain situations" aspect that you're going for without getting too complicated.

razorace
02-10-2006, 07:05 AM
Interestingly enough, I was going thru the bounce code trying to figure out the no bounces in blue issue and I happened across a way to improve the attack fake code. What I did was make it so that if you're not moving, or moving in the same direction as your current attack, you'll simply reverse attack directions. This does make attack fakes much more reasonable at the high swing speeds and also adds a bit of the manual spin button that you suggested earlier.

Anyway, right now I'm just going to toss out some ideas so we can at least form some redementary advantages/disadvantages for the styles/special abilities. The dual/staff saber styles are the "power" styles. There's double the capacity for damage, blocking, etc. but they are also harder to master/control. As such, I think the Dual/Double sabers will end up with the largest pros/cons offsets.

Dual Sabers:
*I see the Dual Sabers mainly being an offensive weapon since the attacker can fake out his opponent and attack from multiple directions at once.
- No transition/faking FP cost
- Double FP for actual attacks *All the movement takes more energy. (this should be pretty offset by the no FP cost for transitions/fakes).
- Higher Threshold for disarms, meaning a dual user has a chance of being disarmed at 75% (or something) DP instead of at the usual 50%

Staff Saber:
*I see the staff saber being more about movement and defense.
- Half DP cost for Saber Blocks
- Double FP for actual attacks
- Higher Threshold for stuns *due to large body movements.

JRHockney*
02-10-2006, 03:33 PM
Interestingly enough, I was going thru the bounce code trying to figure out the no bounces in blue issue and I happened across a way to improve the attack fake code. What I did was make it so that if you're not moving, or moving in the same direction as your current attack, you'll simply reverse attack directions. This does make attack fakes much more reasonable at the high swing speeds and also adds a bit of the manual spin button that you suggested earlier.

Oooooo, excellent. I have an idea along those lines already. Since using fakes uses more FP as your faking, how about if you fake the duration of using 5 points your attack power increase by a tiny bit for the next swing. if you hold on for 10 FP, it increases the attack power of the next swing significantly, but puts you into a stun freeze when its over. it might also be cool it you added longer saber trails to that attack.

Dual Sabers:
*I see the Dual Sabers mainly being an offensive weapon since the attacker can fake out his opponent and attack from multiple directions at once.
- No transition/faking FP cost
- Double FP for actual attacks *All the movement takes more energy. (this should be pretty offset by the no FP cost for transitions/fakes).
- Higher Threshold for disarms, meaning a dual user has a chance of being disarmed at 75% (or something) DP instead of at the usual 50%

Staff Saber:
*I see the staff saber being more about movement and defense.
- Half DP cost for Saber Blocks
- Double FP for actual attacks
- Higher Threshold for stuns *due to large body movements.

I like those ideas alot. They seem very balanced. As for their special moves, I think the standing still one should have the same characteristics as blue lunge except do less DP damage with each individual hit (because these moves can hit more than once). The butterflies should do decent DP damage and knock the attacker over and cost more FP than lunge but not quite as much as red DFA.

As for the dual side to side split attack ( the one that hits two people who are at your sides and only happens when this is the case) this should cause stuns.

BTW, more stuff has been added to pcgamemods so I'm assuming its fixed.

Lathain Valtiel
02-10-2006, 04:13 PM
No, what people are doing is removing their old mods to free up some hard drive space, then addiing new ones in their place.

razorace
02-10-2006, 08:05 PM
Since using fakes uses more FP as your faking, how about if you fake the duration of using 5 points your attack power increase by a tiny bit for the next swing. if you hold on for 10 FP, it increases the attack power of the next swing significantly, but puts you into a stun freeze when its over. it might also be cool it you added longer saber trails to that attack.
I'm not sure what you mean, but I'm not sure there's much more we can do the faking system since it has to be controllable on the time scale of the current saber combat system. Having any more delay in the attacks would make it so the defender could just start attacking.

Also, I had another idea to help make the system easier to use. Should the faking system disable after the player enters into an attack fake to prevent the system from spaz faking due to very quick transition moves? The idea being that players could just hold down both buttons and be able to quickly launch an attack fake without having to release the alt-attack button.

I like those ideas alot. They seem very balanced. As for their special moves, I think the standing still one should have the same characteristics as blue lunge except do less DP damage with each individual hit (because these moves can hit more than once). The butterflies should do decent DP damage and knock the attacker over and cost more FP than lunge but not quite as much as red DFA.
Well, bare in mind that the saber automatically goes into a bounce after each saber-on-saber impact so the dual swing fury would have to do the same DP damage on the first impact to work properly.

As for the butterfly, I'm not sure that we should make it do DP/knockdown like that. It's practically a melee move so should we count it as a melee move and then have the saber aspect of it do something else?

As for the dual side to side split attack ( the one that hits two people who are at your sides and only happens when this is the case) this should cause stuns.
That seems reasonable.

No, what people are doing is removing their old mods to free up some hard drive space, then addiing new ones in their place.
Thanks for the info, Lath. :) Personally, I'd prefer to not remove older versions of the mod for backup purposes.

JRHockney*
02-10-2006, 10:04 PM
I'm not sure what you mean, but I'm not sure there's much more we can do the faking system since it has to be controllable on the time scale of the current saber combat system. Having any more delay in the attacks would make it so the defender could just start attacking.

My basic idea here was just to find a way to make stronger swings in a charge up fashion. But with the next changes this might not be realistic. I do wish there was a way to use that behind the back saber spinning animation from the original red kata in some sort of fake or power move though.

Also, I had another idea to help make the system easier to use. Should the faking system disable after the player enters into an attack fake to prevent the system from spaz faking due to very quick transition moves? The idea being that players could just hold down both buttons and be able to quickly launch an attack fake without having to release the alt-attack button.



Hmmm. I'll have to think on this one a little more, but it sounds good on the surface. Would this involve removing the fact that you have to hold down the attack button to do a full attack? If so, probably not. I like that feature.

Well, bare in mind that the saber automatically goes into a bounce after each saber-on-saber impact so the dual swing fury would have to do the same DP damage on the first impact to work properly.

Ahhh, true, nevermind. I say just make it like the blue lunge or change it up a little somehow for uniqueness sake.

As for the butterfly, I'm not sure that we should make it do DP/knockdown like that. It's practically a melee move so should we count it as a melee move and then have the saber aspect of it do something else?

I'm not entirely sure what you mean, but but as long as it does something, it will be ok with me.

That seems reasonable.

Cool!

Tapela
02-10-2006, 11:13 PM
I must say reading some of the suggests kind of makes me fearful as I totally love how 0.0.6 is already but seeing as JRHockney has had some suggestions implemented already makes me feel alot easier about it. Mostly I worry cause spamming one move was really boring after awhile in early JK2 and 0.0.6 seems so nice already for 1v1 duels.

As for suggestions I really can't think of anything to offer right now realisticly, maybe when you find your way around saberlocks and implement them have some sort of gameplay mechanic behind them. A fun one that would go with the type of saber combat OJP enhanced offers. Not pace breakingly deadly as in base where the loser gets killed alot of the time at the end of a lock, but "fun" and them giving an upperhand. Maybe make it so that the lock would happen at a certain percentage of DP you know? Then the loser without effiecent DP could die as a result from the lock, that i could see. But like I said that isnt too realisitc right now as saberlocks are something far off.

Lathain Valtiel
02-11-2006, 12:05 AM
Implement dodge for gun projectiles is my suggestion. At this rate the whole system is stacked against ANYONE who pulls a saber.

There should be no saber dodge allowed if you're holding a gun.

razorace
02-11-2006, 01:01 AM
Hmmm. I'll have to think on this one a little more, but it sounds good on the surface. Would this involve removing the fact that you have to hold down the attack button to do a full attack? If so, probably not. I like that feature.
It wouldn't involve removing the start fakes.

Ahhh, true, nevermind. I say just make it like the blue lunge or change it up a little somehow for uniqueness sake.
Agreed, for now I'll make it like the lunge.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean, but but as long as it does something, it will be ok with me.
Basically, it would mean that the butterfly would do it's damage as a melee move (with the feet). The saber might also cause some sort of effect but it would be secondary to the melee damage.

Mostly I worry cause spamming one move was really boring after awhile in early JK2 and 0.0.6 seems so nice already for 1v1 duels.
I totally agree. That's why I've been so slow to impliment changes to the special moves. Simply put, I won't allow spamming in Enhanced. :)

Then the loser without effiecent DP could die as a result from the lock, that i could see. But like I said that isnt too realisitc right now as saberlocks are something far off.
So, basically, turn it into a finishing move like the lunge move. I like that idea. The easiest way might be to knock off a decent amount of DP off the loser of a saberlock.

Implement dodge for gun projectiles is my suggestion. At this rate the whole system is stacked against ANYONE who pulls a saber.
Yeah, I need to retool the gun blocking and the guns in general. I just haven't gotten to it yet. :)

There should be no saber dodge allowed if you're holding a gun.
Actually, I disagree with that. Gun users (especially those with jedi powers) should have dodge, just less of it. Eventually DP/FP amounts will be determined by which skills the players buy.

JRHockney*
02-11-2006, 01:32 AM
It wouldn't involve removing the start fakes.

Ok, I'm for it then! LOL

Actually, I disagree with that. Gun users (especially those with jedi powers) should have dodge, just less of it. Eventually DP/FP amounts will be determined by which skills the players buy.

I think dodge should be based on the gun you are using. For a weal and slow gun like pistol, 3 hits with the saber. Moderate guns like blaster and disruptor, 2 hits. For any other strong or heavey weapon, instant death.

I have a few more ideas to get down before I forget them:

1. Back hits do 50% DP damage (i've said this before but I think its still a good and realistic idea) Manual back blocks might be cool too.

2. Make the block detection higher and hitbox bigger (again, I've said this before but I have a reason for it in suggestion 3)

3.I think it would be realistic to prevent players from getting too close to each other because they would realistically have no room to swing and it would help keep the sabers from going through the player with no damage. This will be done by causing players to only fake if they try to swing too close to the opponent and by making them both lose DP if they touch each other. If they touch eachother, I think they should both go into the saber lock animation but not actually do a real saber lock. They should be able to get out of it by backing up. If the saber lock animation can't be used, I would suggest the animaition for blue base stance when you look up doing it.

4. New saber clash sounds. I honestly can't stand the deflaut ones because they end up sound like caaahhhhgggghghhgghghgghghgg most of the time, I made may own hybid saber sound pk3 using the following saber sound mods:

http://www.pcgamemods.com/mod/3909.html Which is very good if you like the oldschool SW saber sounds. These are alot more distinctive sounding than default as well. You can actually hear the individual hits much better.

and

http://jediknight2.filefront.com/file/Movie_Stances_20;37063 That's right, it's not just a animation mod. I used the wall hit sounds and the bounding sounds from this mod and combined them with the mod above. You should try it out.

razorace
02-11-2006, 03:38 AM
Gun based DP: I can understand the DP cost doubling/tripling based on the blukeyness of the weapon but have a completely different DP cost scale for the guns would be very tricky to impliment. I'll see what I can come up with. :)

1. I personally think that double DP is probably enough. Anymore and back attacks will be overly powerful. Unfortunately, I still haven't come up with a good way to be able to detect back attacks without also picking up overreaching attacks that are actually coming from attackers in front of the player.

2. I think it's fine until I add Keshire's block animations back in since the current block animations pretty instanous.

3. Mmmm, for gameplay reasons I don't think we'll be able to make players fight farther apart from each other. Basically, simply too easy to get "too close" due to the way the hit detection/animations/movement works. Unfortunately, I don't think we could encourage people to stay farther apart without totally nerfing things and making it unfun.

4. I'll check out the packages and see what I think. Unfortunately, most saber noise mods don't have clean enough samples to be useable without hearing annoying sampling artifacts like background music.

JRHockney*
02-11-2006, 04:14 AM
1. I personally think that double DP is probably enough. Anymore and back attacks will be overly powerful. Unfortunately, I still haven't come up with a good way to be able to detect back attacks without also picking up overreaching attacks that are actually coming from attackers in front of the player.

Ahhh, yeah MB2 has the same problem with over reaching attacks. probably a good idea to keep it normal until the hit detection can improve or something.

3. Mmmm, for gameplay reasons I don't think we'll be able to make players fight farther apart from each other. Basically, simply too easy to get "too close" due to the way the hit detection/animations/movement works. Unfortunately, I don't think we could encourage people to stay farther apart without totally nerfing things and making it unfun.

Your probably right about making it too hard to keep player from getting close to each other; however, I do still like the idea of penalitizing them both with DP loss if they touch each other and it would still be realistic because their saber would do the damage by touching. That will at least help them to keep their distance a little bit with out being too unfun ( I think most players will understand the logic at least to that extent and not get frustrated). I also kind of like the idea of adding the saber lock animation if they do touch eachother as I described before, but this may of course have unforseen problems.

I just had a quick idea in order to increase the skill of causing DP loss. when you parry someone and they are stunned in a DP > 50 situation, if your next hit on the his stun at the exact opposite on where his swing started it will do more DP damage and do DP damage even if he hits the right parry direction. I'm not sure how this would work with top-down swings though. I also think DP drain should be increased alittle more for when you hit an opponent first at the complete opposite end of where his saber is if possible during regular combat.

Btw, even though I though default was a little too fast last night when we fought, I really like that intensity that we where fighting at without being so cautious. I suggest two possibilities to keep this factor but make it realistic:

1. Find an in between FP gain setting that is a good compromise between the two settings.

or

2. Keep it at default but make certain moves like kicking a stun (or kicking in general) do more FP damage.

razorace
02-11-2006, 04:41 AM
Well, idle sabers already do minor DP damage to the other player so DP lost does already occur if the players get to close to each other.

As for a saber location DP cost scaler, I'm not sure the hit detection is accurate enough to make that seem fair. Plus, I think it's best if DP costs are pretty consistant to make it easier to "eyeball" your DP level. (It makes balancing easier too.)

As for the FP regen, we will see. The latest improvements are making it possible to kill someone without using up so much FP (faking, lunge, etc) so I'd like to keep it the same for now. :)

Lathain Valtiel
02-11-2006, 05:49 AM
You don't understand.

Look, if the gun user has the ability to jump even REMOTELY well, he can EASILY evade a saber swing ALL on his own. Ask ANYONE who has played for any good length of time how pathetically easy it is to dodge an oncoming saber user when you have a gun. It does NOT help that slashing drains force now too, and lower force means slower swings, which makes it even EASIER on gun users.

Gunners do NOT deserve any second chances from the dodge system. If they allow a saber user to make contact, balance dictates that they should DIE instantly for their ineptitude.

razorace
02-11-2006, 06:21 AM
Couldn't the jump argument be made for saberers evading as well? You can't dodge while in mid-air so if the saberer can catch them if would be over quickly.

Unfortunately, this is a bit of a weird situation since the gunners basically have Jedi Master force mastery. Realistically the gunners would just be hunted down on the ground and sliced in half like the stormies in SP. This problem would be mainly fixed by having gunner/jedi classes but I haven't gotten that far yet. :)

As a partial measure, I just finished the retooling of the bolt blocking stuff so it should make things much easier on the Jedi since they can't even get hit unless they totally run out of DP or stunned/knockdowned/etc.

razorace
02-11-2006, 07:27 AM
After Action Report for the New Faking Revisions:

Wow!

Faking is now useful On the plus side, turtling isn't an option anymore and DP death is much more likely. In addition, the visuals are great. The extended saber trail makes the attack fake look like a heavy strike, which is exactly what it should look like. :)

....in fact, it's TOO useful now. The fact that you can attack fake and do double DP damage and break thru blocks is too much. As for possible fixes, I'm thinking the following....
1. The counter to an attack fake should simply BE attacking. If you're attacking when hit by an attack fake, the fake should be negated.
2. If you happen to hit a player's saber when they are attack faking, they will have to do a mishap check. (Assuming we go to more straightforward mishap handling.) As such, this will create an openning for the "defender" to get their next hit in.
3. If both players are using attack fakes when their sabers collide, I'm thinking that they should be forced into a saber lock (like in the control room during THE DUEL)

I'm pretty excited about the new fake system. I think this is basically the spin move/attack-parry concepts that have been suggested. The combat has more of an edge to it since you can't hide behind your saber blocking.

Well, in terms of missing core components, I'm thinking that there might need to be something to help players that are low on FP/DP. Maybe like a desperation move or something....I don't know. You should be at an disadvantage whenever you're low in DP/FP, it's just seems like you're completely boned if it happens right now.

lightofdarkness
02-11-2006, 10:32 AM
I say make Dark Rage a sort of "come-back" power, the last ditch struggle to swing the grim looking odds in your favour. This would be more of an offensive tool, with each attack poosibly regaining some force points and odge points, although at a high cost of health. The effect would be only momentary ie. for perhaps a single attack string or volley (maybe two) and if you fail to turn it around, you can count yourself boned.

The jedi could have absorb or protect as a light-side version of this whichn focuses on defense (like Obi-Wan when he was being obviouisly overwhelmed by Anakin in Ep III). The amount of successful blocks you make and parries results in DP/FP gain, though if you fail (ie. your guard is broken or you're parried) you may, as stated, count yourself boned. The end of this power would result in players given an auto parry, allowing for breathing room, or increased possibility of knocking the saber out of the offending player's hands.

Of course, these powers should only be accessible when you're in the region of <20FP and <50% DP.

I also would like to suggest that specials be gaurd break moves, result in a knockdown or parry knockback. Red DFA could be the one which results in a parry like knockback, Yellow DFA results in a knockdown (helpful when stuck in a corner) and blue lunge should just be a cheeky one shot that only stupid or DP/FP bereft players should get hit by.

Lathain Valtiel
02-11-2006, 02:53 PM
Couldn't the jump argument be made for saberers evading as well? You can't dodge while in mid-air so if the saberer can catch them if would be over quickly.

Unfortunately, this is a bit of a weird situation since the gunners basically have Jedi Master force mastery. Realistically the gunners would just be hunted down on the ground and sliced in half like the stormies in SP. This problem would be mainly fixed by having gunner/jedi classes but I haven't gotten that far yet. :)

You'd think it works that way, but you forget: splash damage weapons. They have to land sometimes, and thus firing splash weaponry at their feet results in their demise as they're coming. That's number 1.

Number 2, what you described is NOT easy. I used to be a demigod at midair slash before I lost the ability, but the timing is extremely difficult, especially if the gunner is varying the height and area of his jumps.

The gunners are presumably firing at you as you're coming.

Assume for a moment that your dodge is triggered as they fire. Presumably, you lose whatever momentum you had while moving towards them (especially if strafe jumping, the best way to catch up to a gun user). This matters for saber users. It doesn't quite matter for gun users.

You also didn't address the slowed swings point.

JRHockney*
02-11-2006, 03:50 PM
Lathain might have a point here. From my own experience playing MB2, I know that if youre fight a good gunner as a jedi and you miss with your saber even once, your dead, even if their using a normal blaster. Even moderately skilled gunners are trouble if you miss them once. At the moment, gunners can activate their saber, jump 10 times higher than gunners can in MB2, and on top of that, use their dodge meter. Simply put: gunners having dodge is too much right now until an actually gunner class is created. When a gunner class is created, then maybe they should be able to dodge once or twice depending on the weapon their using (like my suggestion above if its possible).

Anyways,

This new faking system sounds great, but I can see how it might be over powered and spammed. I like your idea of being able to hit the fake and negated it or cause a parry. Making the fakes a bit slower might help this as well if they are too fast. I do get the feeling that if we don't get this right the first time it will have to be badly nerfed! lol. Question: Willfakes do double damage from whatever the DP damage is of that particular style (assuming you do make differing DP damages...which I still support for the sake fo balance)?

As far as deperation moves, maybe give the desperate defender the ability to block fakes with no DP loss (if this isnt the way it is already) or maybe allow less force drain when using specials once you make them have diferent characteristics like knockdowns, stuns, disarm, etc.(kind of an adrenaline rush like feature)

I also would like to suggest that specials be gaurd break moves, result in a knockdown or parry knockback. Red DFA could be the one which results in a parry like knockback, Yellow DFA results in a knockdown (helpful when stuck in a corner) and blue lunge should just be a cheeky one shot that only stupid or DP/FP bereft players should get hit by.

Actually, we already discussed what you're talking about here further up the thread and it is in the process of being implemented in a similar way. It's good that we're on the same page as far as what should be done. As far as the dark force rage comeback, I'm not sure if that's a good idea since not everyone uses it and it would give that person a big advantage in a saber fight. It would also become like an "essential buy" for force points when they could be put to better use. If everyone automatically got it, than it wouldn't be such a big deal. Interesting concept.

Btw Razor, what do you think of those saber sounds? Improvement?

razorace
02-12-2006, 12:16 AM
Well, I concede the point about the splash damage weapons. Until I add Dodge for splash damage and normal weapons, I'm going to completely disable Dodge for anyone that isn't using a saber.

Question: Willfakes do double damage from whatever the DP damage is of that particular style (assuming you do make differing DP damages...which I still support for the sake fo balance)?
Yes, it will be based off the style the attacker is currently using.

As far as deperation moves, maybe give the desperate defender the ability to block fakes with no DP loss (if this isnt the way it is already) or maybe allow less force drain when using specials once you make them have diferent characteristics like knockdowns, stuns, disarm, etc.(kind of an adrenaline rush like feature)
Or maybe have successful parries regen DP/FP when the player is fatigued?

As far as the dark force rage comeback, I'm not sure if that's a good idea since not everyone uses it and it would give that person a big advantage in a saber fight. It would also become like an "essential buy" for force points when they could be put to better use. If everyone automatically got it, than it wouldn't be such a big deal. Interesting concept.
I think it's an interesting concept as well and probably the best conversion idea for Rage so far. :) Maybe Rage should just boost DP/FP at any time in exchange for health or some other disadvantage? I remember in the past that I felt that it should reduce your score each time you use it but that might not work.

Lathain Valtiel
02-12-2006, 03:02 AM
OH, that reminds me!

Sabers bust down the walls of Siege Korriban in two fast swings in Enhanced. Just FYI.

JRHockney*
02-12-2006, 03:07 AM
Or maybe have successful parries regen DP/FP when the player is fatigued?

Doh! Why didn't I think of that!! LOL

I think it's an interesting concept as well and probably the best conversion idea for Rage so far. Maybe Rage should just boost DP/FP at any time in exchange for health or some other disadvantage? I remember in the past that I felt that it should reduce your score each time you use it but that might not work.

I can't decide on this one. I'll let lightofdarkness discuss this since it was his idea. I do think there should be something else besides health that it drains though.


I've been rethinking my original more powerful but risky turning swing idea. The fact is, the turning move is really ugly in the regular combat when it gets hit while turning without killing the person and I think it should be avoided as much as possible unless purposely done. I was originally worried that it would be too hard to avoid in this fast paced combat, but I think if players learn to anticipate what situations they will be done in, turning swings can be avoided until needed.

However, because this is very hard to learn, I think the penalties for getting hit when turning should not be very severe. Maybe only a little more DP damage than normal and the turning animation gets terminated. The Hitting you opponent with the turning swing should do only a little more DP damage but not cause stuns. Tavion, Blue, and maybe desanns style will have both getting hit penalties and hitting benefits less than the other styles. Maybe eventually, two turning swings colliding could lock like the fakes eventually will.

Hopefully, this will help stop players from unrealistically getting hit in the back and surviving it too often. I also think it will kill swing spamming and add more disipline to this system.

razorace
02-12-2006, 07:48 AM
Sabers bust down the walls of Siege Korriban in two fast swings in Enhanced. Just FYI.
Pwned! :)

Err, that does change the dynamic of Korriban, but the real question is if we should do anything about it.

Doh! Why didn't I think of that!! LOLI assume that means that you think that concept is a good idea? :)

turning move stuff
I assume you're referring to your earlier suggestion about making spin moves followed by an attack swing do more DP damage?

JRHockney*
02-12-2006, 10:00 AM
I assume that means that you think that concept is a good idea?

Yes


I assume you're referring to your earlier suggestion about making spin moves followed by an attack swing do more DP damage?

And also yes, but modified for the reasons stated above. Doing constant turning strikes in this system drives me insane especially when we get hit in the back while doing them and just brush them off as if we weren't just hit in the back with a lightsaber!! So, I think we should be punished a bit for doing them and learn how to control them. Maybe when players start getting really good at controling turning swings we can increase the DP damage given and received when hit doing it, but at first it should be mild (and very very mild for the faster styles). I wouldnt be against making it cause a stun if the defender doesnt use the proper parry direction though, but if he does, it should still do DP damage to the defender.

And like I said before, the fact that players would now have to becareful about doing turning swings they would end up doing less "hold down attack" comboing, and I think this would prevent swing spam from becoming a problem.

Lathain Valtiel
02-12-2006, 03:33 PM
NO!

Don't give spin moves any bonuses, because you're all forgetting something...

The cheat that is yawspin, where after certain swing moves (I assume you mean stuff like a red swing in which you turn before delivering the attack) can be executed multiple times in one attack by making the character spin like a top. I'm pretty sure it only counts as one swing, but has multiple hits.

JRHockney*
02-12-2006, 03:44 PM
NO!

Don't give spin moves any bonuses, because you're all forgetting something...

The cheat that is yawspin, where after certain swing moves (I assume you mean stuff like a red swing in which you turn before delivering the attack) can be executed multiple times in one attack by making the character spin like a top. I'm pretty sure it only counts as one swing, but has multiple hits.

I never learned how to do the Yawspin and I'm not sure it even works for OJP enhanced. If it does, I'm sure Razorace could disable it somehow. With the Yaw spin disabled, it would be easy to hit people in the back when their turning and cause them DP damage. We even discussed slowing down the turns a bit so hitting them would be even easier further back in this thread. And like I said the damage increase for hitting would not be much. The real point of this idea is to get rid of that stupid turning attack in the combat unless intentionally needed....and to kill swing spam!

Come to think of it, I remember watching the Yawspin when I played base and I'm pretty sure it can't be done in Enhanced because all the saber hits bounce. Not to mention that the new view lock feature would probably kill this as well. Of course I'm no expert in this, but we'll see what Razor has to say about it.

razorace
02-12-2006, 09:39 PM
Hockney is right. Beyond the initial hit, yawspin is useless in Enhanced due to the bounce effect and viewlocking.

Anyway, I don't currently think that this turning swing idea will work. The spin moves are part of the way the animations handle transitions between different swing positions. Granting special powers to the transitions with spins would make the saber combat would probably make the saber combat damage levels feel very random. If we could actually gain control over the spin moves that wouldn't be the case but with the current animations we're stuck.

JRHockney*
02-13-2006, 01:36 AM
Well, my point here was really to makle it something the everyone avoids doing but not make it completely useless. I figured it would also help people tell the noobs from the vets easier as well by how well they can control their turn hits. I don't really think it would make the hit damage seem random to anybody who knows the system: basically, you get hit when you try it, your turning move terminates and you lose DP or if you hit someone with it, they lose a little more DP than usual. Pretty black and and white as far as thats concerned, just hard to control not doing which would be its biggest but not impossible downfall. I guess it's not that important right now anyways

Curse those stupid turn moves!!! Is there anyway you could at least speed those animations up so they match the rest of the combo moves?

Have you thought anymore about reducing the force cost of cartwheels backflips, and maybe wall jumps? It might also be interesting if you could parry while you you do it. I was playing around with the cartwheels and wall flips today and had fun with trying to parry them while doing it. I think a few times it actually worked!! LOL. Anyway, having low level jumps like these cost less FP (maybe 3-5 FP) would help reduce the monogamy of just standing toe to toe (one of the complaints I've heard from some MB people who have tried it) as well as be true to the movies with only low jumps.

I also still really like your old idea of aborbing a kick with a backflip. Any plans on that?

I know, too many questions. But I want the next build to be another real ground breaker for OJP Enhanced saber system like 0.0.4 was (not that the other two aren't) as far as turning heads. I really wish I could help with the coding process, but right know I'm still struggling how to understand how to make scheduling and cash register programs in Java! LOL

I just had an interesting idea for down the road: For OJP vets, make a game mode where hits that you don't parry/block in the right direction for take a ton more DP and maybe a few other interesting features. For when vets start getting too good and saber fights last 10 minutes this might be an interesting option for them. I'm sure your new powerfake system will help make things quicker, but I'm sure the best will find a way to make fights take forever again.

razorace
02-13-2006, 02:19 AM
Well, I'll have to think about it some more.

I still haven't gotten to the cartwheels and backflips yet. It will just take time.

As for Backflips, I'll get to it. I'd still like to port the SP knockdown code before I add new features to the knockdown stuff.

JRHockney*
02-14-2006, 02:39 AM
I just had a very big idea that I had to get down here, and I think you should pay close attention to it because I think this could really help back and forth combat some more focus and improve the over all combat greatly if its possible (I love run-on sentences!!)

This idea comes from the scene in Episode six where luke is overpowering vader and starts hammering on vader block until vader is too weak to hold the saber there and luke cuts off his hand.

First off, remeber this idea:

I just had a quick idea in order to increase the skill of causing DP loss. when you parry someone and they are stunned in a DP > 50 situation, if your next hit on the his stun at the exact opposite on where his swing started it will do more DP damage and do DP damage even if he hits the right parry direction. I'm not sure how this would work with top-down swings though.

You said that the hit detection on the body was not good enough to be consistant in damage and I agree.

However, What if the person attacking the parry targeted the saber instead which from my experience, has great hit detection! I was playing around with it today and found that the opponents saber is still hard to hit when they are in the parry because they are drawing it back slowly; but it in not too hard especially if the person doing the parry times it so the attack gets parried with their saber in front of them. This idea has the following benefits:

1. This would add soooooooooooo much to strategy in doing parries and attacking them.

2. Because players will now be targeting the saber instead, it will make the fights look more movie realistic because the parried person is getting hit around the area of his saber rather than somewhere else on his body that he wouldn't be able to block!

3. This could be the balance we need to balance out defense against the new power fakes that have the potential to be used too much in in the way of attacking.

4. You could make the penalties for getting hiton your saber in a parry anything you want. I would suggest the following:

a. if the parried person hits parries the attack that hits his saber, they will still lose DP in a marginal amount.

b. If the parried person does not parry attack that hits his saber or hit the proper parry direction, he will lose more DP than if he parried it and also lose some FP.

c. If the parried person is using a style two styles weaker than the attacker and the parried person does not parry the incomming attack right, the parried person will get disarmed.

Of course this is all assuming that the parried person can actually parry when just his saber is hit. It seems to work that way normally so hopefully that won't be a problem.

Man I hop you like this idea and it can be done, because I believe it would totally be an incredibly benefitial edition to the saber system and make it even more movie realistic!


Just a quick suggestion: if you do decide to make the yellow arial special more of a "flip over your opponent move" I would suggest making the animation faster and the jump a bit further. I also think it should at least to a tiny bit of DP damage.

I sure you are so busy with school right now that you don't even want to think about new suggestions, but I really think the first one warrants full attention. And let me down easy if you think it sucks, because I love this idea .......really......... (starts sobbing)

LOL

razorace
02-14-2006, 03:10 AM
You lost me there. So basically, the idea is that attackers would drain more DP by hitting the defender's saber vs their body? Would this be just during a knockaway animation that a player plays when they parry a blow?

JRHockney*
02-14-2006, 03:22 AM
You lost me there. So basically, the idea is that attackers would drain more DP by hitting the defender's saber vs their body? Would this be just during a knockaway animation that a player plays when they parry a blow?

Ok, I used TOO many run on sentences there! LOL.

I'm taking about after an attacker is parried at DP > 50, he enters that slow drawback animation, right? Well, if the defender who just parried the attacker attacks (becoming the new attacker) and hits the slowly drawing back saber of the former attacker (now the new defender) who is now parried, the parried defender will lose more DP.

If the defender was able to press the right parry direction as the attacker hit their parried saber, they will still lose some DP. If they don't press the right parry direction in that situation, they will lose more DP and maybe some FP as well (but that's your call). I also listed some other possibilities above.

This DP loss should only be the case when you hit a parried saber though.

razorace
02-14-2006, 03:30 AM
It's a good idea, but I wouldn't make it too much of a DP drain. I'd probably make it a comboed FP/DP drain to make it an additional option other than attacking their body (drain DP) or kicking them (drain FP).

JRHockney*
02-14-2006, 03:49 AM
Fair enough, however, I do still think they should still lose some Dp or DP/FP even if they do parry it correctly. I think that the more the players can go for the sabers in attacking parries, the more realistic it will look.

I'm sure youre worried that too much DP or FP loss will be too much for this move, but after practicing do this for a while, it is almost hard enough to warrant a big loss if they don't parry it right because the saber is often very hard to hit in the drawback. This will especially be the case when human players no to avoid the other saber when they get parried.

It may have to work a it differently for staff and dual though since there is more serface area to hit. Maybe having no extra DP loss could be one of the benefits of the staffs extra defensive abilities and being easy to hit would be one of the downfall of Dual's heavy attacking ability.

razorace
02-14-2006, 04:28 AM
You can't parried while stunned so it's an all or nothing idea.

It just occurred to me that there's currently no behavior specified for getting hit on the saber while in a bounce move. It seems to me that a player that directly hits a bounced saber should cause a mishap roll for the defender. That way players have a possible way to cause actual stuns/disarms/etc while at high FP/DP levels. What do you guys think?

JRHockney*
02-14-2006, 04:39 AM
You can't parried while stunned so it's an all or nothing idea.

Oh, ok. I was worried about that, but its still ok with a consistant damage. Just use your best judgement as to how much extra it should be by hitting there.


It just occurred to me that there's currently no behavior specified for getting hit on the saber while in a bounce move. It seems to me that a player that directly hits a bounced saber should cause a mishap roll for the defender. That way players have a possible way to cause actual stuns/disarms/etc while at high FP/DP levels. What do you guys think?

A bounced saber? Not sure what situation youre refering to. If you refering to hitting a saber on it's way back to ready position after bouncing off an opponent who just blocked, how would the opponent hit that returning saber in time?

If youre referring to getting hit while performing an attack button tap fake, have I'll have to think about that one because I like to use that as to block sabers sometimes to trip out my opponent! lol.

I'll see youre response tomarrow. Goodnight.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

razorace
02-14-2006, 12:11 PM
I'm referring to when a player attacks a player's saber when they're in the slow bounce caused by avoiding a stun or knockdown with high DP/FP. I'm thinking that maybe it should cause the stun/knockdown that was avoided. That way players can still cause stuns/knockdowns at high DP/FP but only with a decent amount of skill.

JRHockney*
02-14-2006, 03:54 PM
I'm referring to when a player attacks a player's saber when they're in the slow bounce caused by avoiding a stun or knockdown with high DP/FP. I'm thinking that maybe it should cause the stun/knockdown that was avoided. That way players can still cause stuns/knockdowns at high DP/FP but only with a decent amount of skill.

So basically you mean that you think my idea should cause stuns and knockdowns rather than just more DP/FP loss. Maybe, but I'm not sure I would prefer it over just causing of it just causing more DP/FP loss, I'll have to think about that some more.

How about a compromise. How about if they hit it with the same style the parried opponent is using or weaker, it does more DP/FP damage; if they hit it with a style one style stronger, it knocks them over; if they hit with a style two styles stronger, it disarms them; and if they hit it with a style 3 or more stronger, it causes a big stun.

Also, I'm wondering if we should make the powerfake do less damage than it normally does when attacking a parried person in order to promote using it more offensively and not give big, easy heavy damage to parried people that costs low FP for the attacker. The exception could be when a power fake hits the parried persons saber and it could even up the power effect of the style being used (that is if you decide to go with my last suggestion).

razorace
02-14-2006, 07:21 PM
1. Actually no, I was referring to attackin the saber while a player is in a slow bounce. Your idea sounded like it involved attacking the saber while the player is in a stun.

2. Bear in mind that there is no such thing as a "stronger" style in OJP Enhanced. I'm dead against rock-paper-scissors game mechanics. Also, when I add the keshire block animations back in, it's probably going to dramatically increase the number of times there are true saber-on-saber blocks vs the "fake" bounding box/body blocks. As such, I don't think we should do anything that could depend on weither or not the player hits the actual saber blade during a block.

3. Parried attack fakes don't currently cost the defender any DP, but it also doesn't parry the attacker. I think that's a fair trade off at the moment since attack fakes are pretty powerful as is.

JRHockney*
02-14-2006, 10:33 PM
Arrgh, I'm so confused! :headbump So there's a slow bounce that takes place other than when you parry someone who has DP > 50? This is the slow-bounce "stun" I've been referring to this whole time with this "hit the saber idea, not the slow, completely exposing stun that occurs after the parried person has DP < 50.

So if we were on the same page here as far as what we both we're talking in terms of the slow bounce "stuns," then you're saying that there is another circumstance in which slow bounces occur other than getting parried when you have DP > 50? If so, when? I don't remember ever seening it happen. And if it does happen, then I'll have to try it and see if your ideas are balanced.

If we werent on the same page as far as what we both were talking about, than you might want to re-read my original suggestions on it and see why I suggest doing it the way I have.

Btw, whole idea about stronger styles doing different causing different mishaps maybe rock-paper-scissors like in a sense, but it is balanced because the slower styles will will have a harder time hitting the slow drawback stun (DP > 50). If the style the parried defender is using is weaker and faster than the attackers style, the defender will drawback a bit faster and the attacker will swing slow, thus making it harder for the attacker to actually hit the defender saber as it slowly draws back

An alternative to the stronger styles cause different mishaps idea could be the angle at which you hit the parried defenders saber on the drawback, For example: if you hit it at an almost perfect perpendicular angle, it causes a disarm. This look really cool when I did something similar to it today while test this idea because it looked like he was suppose to get disarmed at that angle anyway. Of course I have the feeling that causing different mishaps based on the angle you hit at can't really be done anyway.


Oh, and btw, if you want to lose all hope in humanity and "hooked on the feeling" that we are all doomed, go here :xp: http://www.youtube.com/watch.php?v=Gi2CfuqcUGE

razorace
02-14-2006, 11:04 PM
1. right. The slow bounce is the slow recoil move that happens at 50+ DP. I guess I wasn't understanding what you meant by stun. I thought you meant of the stumbling backwards knocked animations that occur < 50 DP. So, basically, I think we're talking about the same thing at the same time. :)

2. There are two types of bounces. The slow bounce occurs whenever the player "avoids" a mishap by having enough DP/FP. The other type of bouncing is the regular bounces that occur whenever the saber hits something that can take damage. Normal bouncing isn't a penalty so much as the normal bounce/recoil from a saber impact.

3. As I stated earlier, it might be better to have it cause a "true" mishap vs just costing more DP/FP. That way there will be some mechanic (even if it's hard to do) to cause true mishaps at high DP/FP levels. Hopefully this would add some flavor to the game.

4. I just don't like the idea of styles being inherently "better". I like the idea of pros/cons, but I don't think any style should be a "set" counter-balance to another. My feeling is that style should be a matter of choice rather than need. As such, a player should be able to happily play while just using a single style the entire time.

Speaking of style balancing, I could use some feedback about the various single saber styles and how they should be balanced. My creative juices just aren't sparking for the single sabers. I've already finished the dual/double saber balancing and I'm pretty happy with the results. I was letting the bots just go at it for a while and the dual/double sabers don't seem to have the inherent advantage that they used to. Woot!

5. As for doing something angle based, I'm not sure how the math would work for something like that. Raven tried something similar for some of their code but it's really complicated and I'm not sure I could do any better than they did on that sort of thing.

JRHockney*
02-15-2006, 12:52 AM
3. As I stated earlier, it might be better to have it cause a "true" mishap vs just costing more DP/FP. That way there will be some mechanic (even if it's hard to do) to cause true mishaps at high DP/FP levels. Hopefully this would add some flavor to the game.

The thing I'm worried about is that it would end up being not too hard for a vet to hit the opponents saber in this situation. I myself have been getting very good at hitting the tabbot's saber in this situation all ready. For example: if a person is using red and gets slowbounce parried by a person using yellow, the guy using red will slow bounce very slowly and easily get hit by the person using red. same would go for yellow vs tavions. Are you starting to see why I suggested that stronger styles only cause the mishaps?

4. I just don't like the idea of styles being inherently "better". I like the idea of pros/cons, but I don't think any style should be a "set" counter-balance to another. My feeling is that style should be a matter of choice rather than need. As such, a player should be able to happily play while just using a single style the entire time.

The pro of stronger styles is that they cause mishaps in this situation and the con is that they are much more easily hit by a faster, but weaker style when they get slowbounce parried. I also think that having still having DP/FP drain happen for hitting a slow bounce with the same or weaker/faster style should be this way because it would keep this back and forth action going strong when players get good at hitting eachothers sabers (and like I said, its really not that hard with styles of the same speed or faster). If it turns out that it is still too easy to hit the opponents slowbouncing saber with a style that is only one style slower/stronger we could also make it two styles stronger to cause a mishap.

Speaking of style balancing, I could use some feedback about the various single saber styles and how they should be balanced. My creative juices just aren't sparking for the single sabers. I've already finished the dual/double saber balancing and I'm pretty happy with the results. I was letting the bots just go at it for a while and the dual/double sabers don't seem to have the inherent advantage that they used to. Woot!

Hmmm, well I've suggested making the DP damages based off the speed of the style, I.E. tavion the fastest and weakest, and red the slowest and strongest. I think as far as how to implement the DP damage differences, I think that the differing damages should be as little as possible without making the differences insignificant. Example: tavion does 1, blue 1.5, yellow 2, desann 2.5, and red 3. This still might be too much, but use your best judgement.

As for specials in these styles, you already mentioned that you are implementing the blue lunge for all the styles (which I would also suggest finding alternate animations for each, like tavions becomes stab, desanns becomes the staff spinning special, etc.) I would also suggest either having all these styles have two specials including the lunge (or substitute animation) and something else (that you have unimplemented like that spinning DFA you thought about adding to desanns style) or maybe just making the a style that one has one special be given a more powerful move (like making blue lunge stronger than other and tavions roll stab stronger) if you would like to make new specials for a style that only has one, you could also look around for new animations and see if you can just get some of the animaitons for the special moves of JA+ 2.4 or the chaos mod......or ask Keshire if he has any new ones.

I hope that helps. It doesn't I can keep thinking about it.

razorace
02-15-2006, 01:24 AM
The thing I'm worried about is that it would end up being not too hard for a vet to hit the opponents saber in this situation. I myself have been getting very good at hitting the tabbot's saber in this situation all ready. For example: if a person is using red and gets slowbounce parried by a person using yellow, the guy using red will slow bounce very slowly and easily get hit by the person using red. same would go for yellow vs tavions. Are you starting to see why I suggested that stronger styles only cause the mishaps?
Right now the bounce animation speeds/lengths are pretty much the same so I don't think there's a huge difference between the styles. I conceed that it might be too easy to get the bounced saber during a slow bounce but since getting into a stun/knockdown isn't that bad of a situation I think it would work out. How about we possibly try it and see what happens? :)

As for specials in these styles, you already mentioned that you are implementing the blue lunge for all the styles (which I would also suggest finding alternate animations for each, like tavions becomes stab, desanns becomes the staff spinning special, etc.) I would also suggest either having all these styles have two specials including the lunge (or substitute animation) and something else (that you have unimplemented like that spinning DFA you thought about adding to desanns style) or maybe just making the a style that one has one special be given a more powerful move (like making blue lunge stronger than other and tavions roll stab stronger) if you would like to make new specials for a style that only has one, you could also look around for new animations and see if you can just get some of the animaitons for the special moves of JA+ 2.4 or the chaos mod......or ask Keshire if he has any new ones.
Right now all singles have the lunge and the overhead flip. The flip currently has two variations, a flip stab for the "lighter" styles and a overhead slash for the "heavier" styles. As for the DFA, red is currently the only style that does it but I plan to expand it to include purple (desann) with the spinning DFA move and possibly yellow.

In addition, I reworked things so that DFAs and overhead flips can be done with the same stance. DFAs can now be done in mid-air and now require a top swing windup before they will work. But you do have to be moving at run speed for it to work.

razorace
02-15-2006, 01:26 AM
Hmmm, well I've suggested making the DP damages based off the speed of the style, I.E. tavion the fastest and weakest, and red the slowest and strongest. I think as far as how to implement the DP damage differences, I think that the differing damages should be as little as possible without making the differences insignificant. Example: tavion does 1, blue 1.5, yellow 2, desann 2.5, and red 3. This still might be too much, but use your best judgement.
Actually I've been trying to make the styles all move at about the same speed. Unfortunately, the swing speeds are a bit deceptive since the windup speeds vary quite a bit.

JRHockney*
02-15-2006, 02:21 AM
Right now the bounce animation speeds/lengths are pretty much the same so I don't think there's a huge difference between the styles. I conceed that it might be too easy to get the bounced saber during a slow bounce but since getting into a stun/knockdown isn't that bad of a situation I think it would work out. How about we possibly try it and see what happens?

Oh alright, it's your call. But I'm still worried about putting too many gaps in the back and forth combat as well as the fact that faster styles will be able to hit the slowbounces of slower styles much easier than vice versa. I don't know, maybe if the slower styles do more DP damage in general, that could be the balancing factor.

Right now all singles have the lunge and the overhead flip. The flip currently has two variations, a flip stab for the "lighter" styles and a overhead slash for the "heavier" styles. As for the DFA, red is currently the only style that does it but I plan to expand it to include purple (desann) with the spinning DFA move and possibly yellow.

In addition, I reworked things so that DFAs and overhead flips can be done with the same stance. DFAs can now be done in mid-air and now require a top swing windup before they will work. But you do have to be moving at run speed for it to work.

Wow, interesting. You're ahead of me on that one.

Actually I've been trying to make the styles all move at about the same speed. Unfortunately, the swing speeds are a bit deceptive since the windup speeds vary quite a bit.

Honestly, unless you really do some serious tweaking to the windup speeds, I don't think they'll ever move at the same speed. The number of frames of each style seem to vary alot as well so it would be really hard for them to move at the same speed from that standpoint as well.

But honestly, I would rather them not move at the same speed so making different DP damages is reasonable. I think varying speeds and varying DP damages allows for a lot more variaty in individual styles and tactics. If they do all move at the same speed, red is also always going to have an advantage over the others because of its reach. I suppose if red was just a slight bit slower than the others and tavions was just a slight bit faster, it would balance out, but those windup animations kill.

Another possibility is varying FP damages amoung the styles, but this would have to be only if you decided play with default FP gains otherwise, everyone would run out of steam way too quickly.

I also think it would be interesting to choose maybe three of the existing singles when using single kind of like how force mod 3 did it. It would also open up the possiblity of making weaker single saber styles based on staff and dual moves. This would allow for custimization for peoples individual styles.

razorace
02-15-2006, 03:49 AM
Other than the tavion/blue style, the styles are pretty synced up now. As for balance, I think the windup periods for the larger swing styles will simply have slower windups. This balancing has been done for the most part already. It's really just a matter of tweaking the overall speeds and the speeds of individual windups that don't quite move right. For this purpose, loads of feedback on the style speeds would be great. :)

FYI, I've already tweaked the blue attack swings to make them more at the speed of theo the styles.

JRHockney*
02-15-2006, 04:23 AM
Other than the tavion/blue style, the styles are pretty synced up now. As for balance, I think the windup periods for the larger swing styles will simply have slower windups. This balancing has been done for the most part already. It's really just a matter of tweaking the overall speeds and the speeds of individual windups that don't quite move right. For this purpose, loads of feedback on the style speeds would be great. :)

FYI, I've already tweaked the blue attack swings to make them more at the speed of theo the styles.

I still think if your going to have slower windups you need more DP (or FP) damage done with that style other wise no one is going to want to use it. The last time I tried to fight you with red style, I got my arse kicked because I could not react fast enough or do enough DP damage so I really think something should be done balance wise until all the speeds are perfectly match or at least much closer than they are now.

Btw, for one of the up coming versions of Enhanced, I'd like to make a professional looking manual for the saber system and other important changes. I already have to make some kind of manual as an assignment for my Technical Writing class, so I figured I'd use OJP Enhanced for it. If you would like to use it with the release of v0.0.7 or 0.0.8 you'll have to describe in detail what the changes are or let me play around with it before the release. My manual assignment is due March 15, so it will have to be about a version released before then if you want to use it. If you did decide to use it, I would update it for each release.

razorace
02-15-2006, 05:46 AM
We will have to see about the saber swing speeds. Red's main problem at the moment is that some of the windups in certain directions are just insanely slow. I can fix those issues as people figure out which swing directions have the crappy windups. If it ends up not being enough, I'll add in the DP differences.

As for a manual, that would be awesome. OJP has been lacking a well done manual since...ever! Are you sure that your teacher would count this as an acceptable project for the assignment?

Anyway, I suggest that you just grab the new release when it comes out this week and go from there. I don't think I can describe things in enough detail have you just transcribe them into a manual. There's been a LOT of changes since the last version, but I beleive I'm pretty good about documenting the changes in the changelog. You could use that as a starting point for your manual.

FYI, in terms of the changelog entries, 0.0.7 will be the largest release yet. I currently have over a page worth of changelog info for it.

razorace
02-15-2006, 06:26 AM
Ok, the bots are currently totally rocking my socks now. They're pretty wicked fighters with the latest changes and this is dispite the fact that they don't use any of the special moves.

I think my bug fixes combined with the simplifed saber behavior mechanics has made a notable improvement to the back/forth action. Most notably, I fixed it so that players can't parry when being forced into a block from an attack or bounce. As such, players have to be physically on the defense before they can do a parry and this fixes a problem where players were able to parry blows while swing spamming their opponent. The players are forced to actively attempt to block before they can get another good swing attempt in. Swing, Swing, Block, Block, Parry, Swing, Swing, Attack Fake, Lunge Finisher! Woot!

razorace
02-15-2006, 06:43 AM
Well, color me impressed, the saber sounds from http://www.pcgamemods.com/mod/3909.html are pretty good. But there's a question of either or not we should change the sounds away from the defaults. Plus,we'll have to get permission from the author to use the sounds if we decided to use them.

JRHockney*
02-15-2006, 02:31 PM
As for a manual, that would be awesome. OJP has been lacking a well done manual since...ever! Are you sure that your teacher would count this as an acceptable project for the assignment?

Last time I asked my teacher, she said it was ok as long as the manual didn't end up being too long. I'll ask her again today. I may also change up the wording a bit for the release to make it more fun to read because as most technical writing documents go, they are pretty boring to read.

Have you done anything to the slow bounce vulnerability yet? You should try attemping to hit one of their slow bounces before you make a final decision on how it will work as far as what Dp damage or mishaps happen an when. If it seems good to you, go for it. Although I don't think it should be able to cause DP < 50 like stuns because you can often get more than one swing in cause too much DP loss and they are better "finish him!" poses anyway. I think it should just be knock downs or maybe disarms........or DP/FP loss with the same style! :p

And just out of curiousity, will the low jumps like cartwheels, wall jumps, and backflips have les FP drain in time for the next release? What about that killer backflip kick absorbing idea you had?

Well, color me impressed, the saber sounds from http://www.pcgamemods.com/mod/3909.html are pretty good. But there's a question of either or not we should change the sounds away from the defaults. Plus,we'll have to get permission from the author to use the sounds if we decided to use them.

Yeah I thought you'd like Clouds Sounds. They sound really good when combined with a few of the movie sounds noises too (especially the wall hit). Until we get the authors permission, I would suggest putting a link to it in the read me saying that these sounds are good to use with Enhanced.

I look very forward to trying out 0.0.7 and posting the changes at the MB site, I think these changes will really give Enhanced the versitility it needs to impress alot more people.

razorace
02-15-2006, 04:21 PM
Have you done anything to the slow bounce vulnerability yet?
Not yet. I'm trying to make sure that all the special moves have been retooled for OJP first.

Until we get the authors permission, I would suggest putting a link to it in the read me saying that these sounds are good to use with Enhanced.
Speaking of which, if you got the time, would you mind contacting the author? I don't seem to have the recruiting "touch".

Say, does anyone know if pcgamemods.com is accepting uploads again? It looks like other authors are submitting now.

JRHockney*
02-15-2006, 04:40 PM
Not yet. I'm trying to make sure that all the special moves have been retooled for OJP first.

No problem. One thing at a time is always good.

Speaking of which, if you got the time, would you mind contacting the author? I don't seem to have the recruiting "touch".

LOL, Ok I'll see what I can do.

Say, does anyone know if pcgamemods.com is accepting uploads again? It looks like other authors are submitting now.

Don't know. I checked to see if the new authors have posted things in the past and many of them haven't. Of course this could mean that they just traded out a previous release of theirs as Lathain suggested. You might want to give it a shot.

razorace
02-15-2006, 04:48 PM
I'll try it when I release the next Enhanced version.

Lathain Valtiel
02-15-2006, 05:15 PM
Yeah. What they're doing is updating an old release.

JRHockney*
02-15-2006, 05:20 PM
F.Y.I. After a little bit of research I found Cloud's email address (I think) and sent him an email requesting the use of his saber sounds. If he responds and says yes quickly, we might what to include them in v0.0.7. as a thankyou or something.

razorace
02-15-2006, 06:52 PM
Sounds like a good plan.

Greiver
02-16-2006, 05:38 AM
holy crap i go away for a couple of months thinking OJP had died but now your working on a sabersystem.

time to bring out my old copy of JK:JA an get ready to test test test untill sleep is only a memory

razorace
02-16-2006, 05:43 AM
It's not dead yet. It's normally just a matter of bugging me to release the crap I've finished. :) Lately, JRHockney and Lath have lit a fire under my butt so things have actually been getting done and released.

Greiver
02-16-2006, 06:45 AM
any hints you'd be ablt to give with the sabersystem that could help me not get my ass kicked by bots would be handy,

and as a suggestion you could restrict styles to specific saber handles and make the sabers have different attributes like in Kotor where certain saber mods make the saber better for bolt deflection or saber on saber fighting, also you could speed up red style a little because it always felt weighty and light has no weight, it would still be easyer to block then yellow or blue but it wouldn't be as easy to get out of the way as it is in base Jk:JA just a suggestion cause i always smacked my head into the table if i got hit with red style cause no matter how close you are you can get out of there cause of how slow it was.

i havent played the new enhanced yet so im not sur how it will effect gameplay

JRHockney*
02-16-2006, 04:10 PM
Yes Greiver, join us into in the butt burnination! LOL

As far as tip for killing bots, always (even when youre swinging). When you parry them, hit where there saber isn't and also occasionally kick them and swat at them when they are on the ground. Other than that, just use good strategy overall and be creative. These strategies will become a lot more complex with the next build though.

razorace
02-16-2006, 04:54 PM
From my experience with the latest build, I'd recommend that you don't run while fighting and to stop attacking until you parry if your opponent happens to force you into a block. With the way things work, the dude who is blocking isn't going to be able to hit the attacker from a block with an attack unless he parries the attacker or is really good with the quick swing attacks.

and as a suggestion you could restrict styles to specific saber handles and make the sabers have different attributes like in Kotor where certain saber mods make the saber better for bolt deflection or saber on saber fighting, also you could speed up red style a little.
I'm not really big about assigning anything really important to the hilts (.sab files) since they could be easily abused. Plus, doing so takes a fair amount of control away from the players ingame.

Greiver
02-16-2006, 06:08 PM
oh no the autorun is not a valid win32 function oh no oh no oh no
bloody scratches oh well ill have to try my mint copy

.........

yay its working

JRHockney*
02-16-2006, 07:57 PM
Ok, I can't get it out of my mind, red style is going to get plastered everytime if it doesn't have some kind of attack advantage! Since you can no longer parry while attacking, red will have little or no defense against a faster style when a red fighter starts a swing and because it have no DP damage advantage. If there still will be no DP damage variation amoung the styles and the red windup is still slow, it needs something else. Longer reach just ins't enough of an advantage in this saber system at the moment. Possible suggestions:

1. make red cause longer slow bounces

2. give red a knockdown bonus when the opponent has 75 FP or maybe even DP.

3. More DP points for that style

4. Anything!!! We're going to lose possible Base JA players if they come here and their beloved red style sucks!

Of course these possible alternatives may also vary amoung the other styles as well. Desanns style may get overpowered as well.

razorace
02-16-2006, 08:19 PM
I'll make fixing the windup speeds a priority.

razorace
02-16-2006, 10:02 PM
Ok, I did the math and I dramatically increased the speed of the red/purple's returns and windups. That seems to have fixed things up nicely. :)

JRHockney*
02-16-2006, 10:31 PM
Ok, I did the math and I dramatically increased the speed of the red/purple's returns and windups. That seems to have fixed things up nicely. :)

Good job. Thats a heck of an accomplishment all things considering. I just hope red style doesn't become over used now! LOL

Any chance you'll get to lowering the FP costs for cartwheels, backflips and wall jumps and also the idea about hitting the slow bounces before the release?

I have a quick thought in case hitting the slow bounce is too easy (which i have a feeling it will be): how about if hitting the slow bounce with a normal swing does more DP/FP damage and hitting it with a power fake causes the mishap? This might add veriaty to how to attack, help the back and forth action, and make it a little harder, yet more realistic to cause the DP > 50 mishap.

razorace
02-16-2006, 10:42 PM
The cost for backflips appear to be linked into the jump costs so I don't think I'll be able to change it before the release tonight.

As for your idea, I like it. I might go with that.

JRHockney*
02-16-2006, 10:52 PM
The cost for backflips appear to be linked into the jump costs so I don't think I'll be able to change it before the release tonight.

As for your idea, I like it. I might go with that.

Cool!!! Oh wait.......here it comes............here it comes!!..............THIS IS WORTHY OF A STRONG BAD DANCE!!! :sbdance

So are cartwheels and wall flips linked as well?

Oh, I almost forgot. If you can't get to making the backflip absorb kicks before the release of v0.0.7, you might want to give a temporary means of block so it doesn't become too used as a means of attacking slowbouncing opponents. I might suggest pressing forward to absorb a kick because at least for me, its not as natural of a block/parry direction. This could also be the parry direction for lunge if it isn't already.

razorace
02-16-2006, 11:30 PM
I have no idea about the cartwheels/wall flips.

As for blocking kicks, I think we're going to have to wait until after the next release. I'm kind of overloaded with getting the knockdown code cleaned up in time.

Tapela
02-17-2006, 01:49 AM
Strongbad is cool :). Can't wait for the new version of OJP, you're awesome Razorace. Wish I could support with as many ideas as JRHockney but I don't think I could write so many specificly without getting way too confusing and unbeneficial/unusuable.



Anyway thanks again for your work, I greatly appreciate it and look forward to future releases, maybe I could catch a game with JRHockney or something too :P.

:ltblubou: ...Too excited to sleep :ltblubou:

razorace
02-17-2006, 02:52 AM
Ah, don't worry about it. Just give feedback when you feel like it.

FYI, I just finished the code, packaging up the release right now.

JRHockney*
02-17-2006, 03:05 AM
As for blocking kicks, I think we're going to have to wait until after the next release. I'm kind of overloaded with getting the knockdown code cleaned up in time.

No problem, don't kill yourself working on this. I just had a lecture in my java class about setting unrealistic software development schedules and how things always take longer than you expect. Amazing job on getting even this much done.

Sad story of the day: I noticed today that may CDR/DVD drive on my laptop wasn't working, so I took it in to the manufactorer (PCclub) only to find out that PCclub has shutdown all their Colorado stores!! I ended up having to drop a $100 on a new external CDR/DVD drive today just because its cheaper than geting it fixed by someone else! That's what I get for going with a less known computer brand! LOL :p

Strongbad is cool . Can't wait for the new version of OJP, you're awesome Razorace. Wish I could support with as many ideas as JRHockney but I don't think I could write so many specificly without getting way too confusing and unbeneficial/unusuable.



Anyway thanks again for your work, I greatly appreciate it and look forward to future releases, maybe I could catch a game with JRHockney or something too :P.

...Too excited to sleep

Your feedback is alway welcome, I'm sure. It's all about reading the Razor's responses and thinking in line with how he pictures this system as well as what would be cool for it. I'm also a very visual person and I probably spend to much time visualizing things as it is. Heck, even if your ideas don't get in as much, you can support this mod greatly by telling people about it. If you still ever play base, you can tell people about it on base servers as well. This mod's FFA would be a great alternative to base FFA, it's just a matter of convincing individual players to play or even entire clans to use this new saber system for their servers (as far as convincing clans is concerned, the hard part is convincing the more dogmatic members who are too use to the old base "jump around constantly" saber system to learn something new).

Anyways, yeah I'd love to catch a game with you. Maybe we could make use of that scheduling thread to meet up or something. Maybe I'll post my availability there.

Tapela
02-17-2006, 03:13 AM
I've already told several of my friends about the mod and they like it :). Well one of them might not count as he played earlier versions with me before but did not like the slowness, still i convinced him to try the new version 0.0.5 and he loved it. Just wish I knew more people with JKA :o.

I think OJP is the best dueling mod ever, and its still pretty early in developement if I'm not mistaken, but yeah mostly people want fast paced running around with force speed and shooting things. Me personally? Even in DF2 : JK I was not interested in that type of gameplay, Jedi Oasis (think that was it, favorite gunner/ffa map) wasn't that great, I prefered playing Battleground Jedi jumping across and swinging with mouse2 hehe. Later on I enjoyed the SBX mod greatly with lots of awesome interactive maps, some of them a bit wacky (Jedi Highschool, Ceasars Palace). Soo anyway, yeaah I'm really excited right now, i keep refreshing the page :P.

JRHockney*
02-17-2006, 03:21 AM
[QUOTE]Soo anyway, yeaah I'm really excited right now, i keep refreshing the page :P.[\QUOTE]

Yeah me too. :drool1: And yes your feedback is always welcome. The more ideas posted here the more we have to think with.

Razor, I haven't heard from the Cloud guy yet sadly, but if you haven't finished writing a description yet, you might want to post a link in it to that mod saying that it sounds good when used with this system or something like that.

JRHockney*
02-17-2006, 03:31 AM
Ah, don't worry about it. Just give feedback when you feel like it.

FYI, I just finished the code, packaging up the release right now.

Hooray!!!

As always, I'll post the update info on the MB2 site after I review it. I'll try to make a miniture sufficiant saber system manual in my post there this time as well so people arent at a total loss who want to just play and not read the readmes.

razorace
02-17-2006, 03:45 AM
Done! ojp.jediknight.net/files/betas/ojp_enhanced_007.zip

Sorry for the delay, pcgamemods.com is still down so I had to dump it on the ojp website's ftp. The server will be up as soon as I get the files on there. Please be patient. :)

razorace
02-17-2006, 03:56 AM
JRKockney, you gotta work on your quote tags. :)

As for the sound FX, I forgot to mention them. It will have to wait til next time.

Greiver
02-17-2006, 04:46 AM
ok i keep having this one little problem when i or omeone else dies in duel the server dies its a cl_ error something about parsing

razorace
02-17-2006, 04:56 AM
you probably didn't install the mod correctly. Rememeber that all you have to do is unzip it to the jka folder and it will automatically place it in the right places. Also, run everything from the included .bat file. I'll PM you my contact info so you can IM me if you continue to have problems.

Tapela
02-17-2006, 05:40 AM
Just played some 0.0.7 and I'm VERY impressed the mod feels so different than 0.0.6 its so FUN. I played someone who didn't know how to parry/fake and he kept dying within seconds, I kept parrying and knocking him down or disarming him, its truely great. The mod is just awesome, wow I love it. Thanks again Razorace, I'll probably play alot more tomorrow as for now I'm very tired.

I want to test some things tomorrow with some other friends :) so I better get to bed cause I don't wanna wake up really late.

razorace
02-17-2006, 05:44 AM
Well, remember we have the online server if you want to play with other people. We run it all friday every week. :)

Tapela
02-17-2006, 06:02 AM
Yeah definitely see you guys playing on meatgrinder, just wish I had went there earlier, so tired now :(. Definitely going to be playing there later on in the day, hopefully others will too :). Anyway have fun, I really gotta go to bed now :X.

razorace
02-17-2006, 07:29 AM
Agreed. I'm going to bed too. :)

Greiver
02-17-2006, 08:24 AM
one little question how do bind the block/parry button

razorace
02-17-2006, 02:00 PM
Just move into the attack while not attacking yourself. It's automatic so you don't have to hold down a button to block.

Tapela
02-17-2006, 07:27 PM
So after playing around against people with dual sabers/double I've got to say that they seem a bit overpowered at the moment. For example since they get no fake cost penalty they keep using them and chaining fakes which makes them extremely dangerous since they got two sabers swinging. But the thing is even if you're EXTREMELY careful you're going to get hit eventually. To me the problem is either their FP isnt draining fast enough and keeps them in a flurry or their fakes hit too hard. Why? Eventually I get hit and lose all 4 bars due to the swings being fast and two lightsabers, when that happens I get stunned and I'm usually at either 5 DP after or dead, in which case I either run away as best as I can or die, cause if i hit his saber he's going to stun me again.

Pretty much the problem is that when I get stunned its very deadly against a dual wielded, they can one hit kill me due to their huge DP drain from two sabers. But if I were to stun them it would take a few more to kill them, even if I swung into them with a fake it wouldnt be enough. Same thing for knocking down, the best i can do after I knock a dual wielder down is stay away while he gets up, but if I had got knocked down he would flurry into me and cut me forcing me into losing DP points or even dying sometimes as i kicked forward.


I'm not sure if anyone else sees this too or if it is just me but I've felt that was the problem. Also when someone has saber throw and they get their saber knocked out (disarmed) and they pull it back with the force and if i'm behind and it goes through me the saber will hit me and cause major dodge damage (like two bars) as if it was thrown. I don't know if thats intentional but its very hard to dodge as when someone is disarmed you're usually trying to cut them down and they're backing up trying to pull their saber back.


*Edit* Oh yeah is there a command to make it so that saberlocking is possible in FFA outside of a private duel. I remember razorace saying that it had happened in FFA but I'm not sure if he just meant private duels (k) or regular FFA.

razorace
02-17-2006, 08:44 PM
The dual blades shouldn't have an impact on the amount of DP each attack swing does since the first blade that impacts causes the sabers to go into a bounce

I'll check out the saber throw return issue. It should only be costing standard saber block DP to block. Let me know if you see it in the future.

As for the saberlocks, there's no cvar other than the normal allowsaberlock cvar. I might have enabled saber locks in FFA but I haven't seen it happen outside of duel/powerduel yet. I just haven't messed with it much yet. :)

Tapela
02-17-2006, 10:11 PM
Ah I see. Well for some reason I have an extremely hard time dealing with dual sabers now, maybe i'm not parrying right or something. I try to negate the chaining/faking by swinging into the saber, infact thats how i thought you parried but it seems to have changed. Since you seemingly parry by doing nothing in a certain direction or something. I'd try to parry more but I've been hit so hard by dual sabers that its made me afraid of getting hit and autoblocking. As for a disarmed saber damaging cause it gets pulled back (unignited while this happens) I'm pretty sure it happens frequently, and only if the saber is behind me and he actually pulls it through me when retrieving it.

Hrmm ah well, I'm going to try parrying more if I can, cause frequentlys trying to block his saber while swinging mine into it seems to not work too long. Maybe I just get too close and get my dp torn up :X.

JRHockney*
02-17-2006, 10:19 PM
I agree that dual and staff need a little more balancing, but I do have a few suggestion on how to fight them the way they are now.

1. use alot of basic fakes by just tapping the attack button for attack and even to block. Remember that attack and fakes can double as blocking.

2. Let them swing alot because their swings cost 2 FP.

3. Kick them alot especially when they get parried because it drains their FP. Doing the formerly just yellow arial special to get behind them and kick them is very effective as well.

I can't wait to get off work and fight somemore!!! hehe.

Kyle Kelasheski
02-18-2006, 01:39 AM
Tapela,

I agree with much of your assessments regarding how tough dual/saberstaff duelists are, and I'm speaking only from the perspective of facing bots.

Man, I am SO tempted to hop online and try OJP E out with some real people. But to be honest, I'm a bit worried of getting "hooked" to it like I did to Infiltration.

Do you guys use TeamSpeak? I used that a lot in Infiltration, and I couldn't imagine how much fun (and irresistable) it'd be to play OJP E online with TeamSpeak enabled.

Ahhh, what to do, what to do?

Kyle
Feb. 18, 2006

:)

.

razorace
02-18-2006, 03:28 AM
I hadn't thought of that before. We might want to try it.

Greiver
02-18-2006, 04:51 AM
so blocking is auto and parry all you gotta do is walk the direction that there swinging on.....

do you need to have max saber blocking for it to work well?
cause against bots it parry doesnt seem to work

fakeing is attack1 and attack2 and a direction in the middle of a swing or letting go of attack midswing.

i tryed out power duel with some bots and it was the shortest set of saber fights i ever saw, lasting mere seconds the person on there own was continualy dominated no mattter if they had single doublesided or 2 sabers they were very dead very quick

special attacks should not be dodgable by auto dodgeing cause not only do they leave th user wide open but they also use more Fp from what i see plus most of them you can see coming from a mile away so you can get out of the way.

also how do you make it more dicey as in bots in peices

other then that can't wait to play again next friday on meatgrinder
one other thing team speak = good idea

razorace
02-18-2006, 05:21 AM
Yep, but remember that the fwd/back is "reversed". IE, you need to move backwards to block up and forwards to block down.

And, no, your saber defense level has nothing to do with your parrying/blocking ability.

Special moves already do 2x DP damage to players that were able to block the attack so I don't think that disabling auto-dodge is nessicary.

also how do you make it more dicey as in bots in peices
Wha?

other then that can't wait to play again next friday on meatgrinder
Actually I think I'm going to leave the server on Enhanced for saturday as well. I'll post the news right now. :)

Greiver
02-18-2006, 05:43 AM
make it more dicey as in make it so you can chop people into itty bitty peices

Actually I think I'm going to leave the server on Enhanced for saturday as well. I'll post the news right now.
oooooo goodie goodie goodie

Tapela
02-18-2006, 07:13 AM
Heh Kyle trust me dual saber using people are much harder than the bots :X. I could actually kill the bots in 1v1 but when I duel a friend who uses dual specificly all the time I just can't seem to win consistently.

Greiver
02-18-2006, 09:09 AM
i have a suggestion now or maybe well 2

first allow the dual sabers to attack and gaurd at the same time they take more dp dmg as a draw back but can deal dmg while being attacked so you can at least try and defend your self from 2 people at once

and second make it so that with the doublesided you can parry by going with or against the attack coming at you but cost more FP to swing for an attack

remember these are just suggestions to make these 2 types of sabers more different then they already are.

Lathain Valtiel
02-18-2006, 02:37 PM
Actually I think I'm going to leave the server on Enhanced for saturday as well. I'll post the news right now. :)


...Oh nooooooooooo.

God damn it.

JRHockney*
02-18-2006, 02:57 PM
...Oh nooooooooooo.

God damn it.

:p

Kyle Kelasheski
02-18-2006, 03:45 PM
Hello All,

I need some help getting on OJP E's servers. As I said before, I've only played JA online twice before, so setting it up is a bit strange to me. Especially with what I experienced last night.

I tried entering as a New Favorite and as a New Server the following addresses:
65.99.206.101:29070
and
72.36.250.36:29070

Each time I entered them in they would NOT be listed on the main menu. Why? Is there a step I'm missing? I thought that it would be as easy as typing into the little window the new addresses and then okaying/saving it, but since no new data was displayed on the main menu, then I'm assuming that I'm missing something. Any advice?

Also, what time do most of you start looking for matches? If you could supply your play times adjusted for the Eastern time zone I could try to coordinate my appearance for when most of you are online.

And "Yes," TeamSpeak is an AMAZING utility, especially when one considers that it's totally FREE. It was the ONLY way to play Infiltration, since team work was absolutely essential for survival. I'm guessing that for OJP E it would be primarily used to discuss design ideas, and of course for talking smack. lol

My only worry is that my mic has not been working lately on my system. I have to update my SoundBlaster driver just in case that's the issue.

Have to go now! Hope to see you all online soon!

Yours,

Kyle
Feb. 18, 2006

:lsduel:

.

Tapela
02-18-2006, 04:10 PM
Shift + Tilde key (~), brings down console then type connect and hit CTRL+V which will paste what you copied which will be the IP. So then it will just start connecting and take you to load screen after you hit enter.

razorace
02-18-2006, 06:09 PM
i have a suggestion now or maybe well 2
Those are interesting ideas which would be cool, but I think it would really unbalance the dual/staff sabers. They're already a bit too powerful. :)

Each time I entered them in they would NOT be listed on the main menu. Why? Is there a step I'm missing? I thought that it would be as easy as typing into the little window the new addresses and then okaying/saving it, but since no new data was displayed on the main menu, then I'm assuming that I'm missing something. Any advice?
1. Make sure that your firewall is allowing JKA to access the internet.
2. Press the "Get New List" and/or the "Refresh" buttons after entering in a new favorite.

Anyway, everyone, let's please try to stay on topic here. :) Off topic stuff needs to go in other more approprate threads or in new threads. I check the forums regularly so new threads WILL be seen.

Kyle, if you have additional problems or want to discuss the use of TeamSpeak some more, please take it to the Scheduling Thread (http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?t=159611).

razorace
02-19-2006, 12:25 AM
Good news, I've figured out why the staff/dual sabers were causing more DP damage than they should. There was a bug in the bouncing bug so start animations weren't bouncing but they were draining DP. In addition, I've discovered some bounces are supposed to be using return anims instead of bounces and as such, I'll to change the code a little so that returns can be used as slow bounces.

razorace
02-19-2006, 04:27 AM
Unfortunately, it looks like the bug fixes weren't enough to solve all our dual/staff balancing issues. By using the bots, which all act like the same person in terms of fighting skill, to experiment, I've come up with following to balance them out:

Duals:
- Increased saber attack FP cost to 3.

Staffs:
- DP cost for saber blocks increased from 50% standard cost to 75% standard cost.
- Increased saber attack FP cost to 4.
- Increased transition/attack fake FP cost to 4.

This does appear to balance out the various sabers so that the dual/staff users don't have a clear advantage. However, I realize that these are pretty drastic changes so I'm welcome to alternative suggestions.

BTW, I did try out the sabers myself after making the tweaks and I can safely say that the dual/staff sabers aren't impossible to use after the changes. While the FP drain is pretty high, it appears to be super easy to parry while using the staff saber.

lightofdarkness
02-19-2006, 12:00 PM
In my playing experience, Dual Sabers are easily beaten with a single saber. Easily parried too. The staff is the one with the big balance issues. That and the blue dashing rising slash (you know, the one the Reborn spam in SP), which has some clipping bugs. It can become a one hit killer (DP and FP seem to be no help) and moves at ridiculous speed at times. It especially blows ehn you've been knocked down, as even kicking towards the opponent (force assisted get up) will get you killed if they initiate the move. I've also noticed camera bugs when being thrown. On the beta server I was thrown by a mind tricking player (horribly spammed the ability to melee while invisible, might need to be balanced a bit better too). Anyway, after he'd thrown me I was off screen for about 2 seconds, then the camera swictehd again and I was on screen, though I was looking at my feet on the ground and when I attempted a get up (which involved kick jumping forwards TOWARDS the screen, looked very cool and dramatic for a bug :D ), I was killed by that blue lunge again. Fun times. All in all though, I found that online the saber system really does shine as much as offline, if not more so. Congrats, you've managed to create the most intuitive and accurate lightsaber combat system in any game to date!

razorace
02-19-2006, 05:31 PM
Please spread each item/issue you bring up over different sentences, paragraphes, or bullets. Right now, it's very hard to read what you're trying to say. I appreciate the feedback thou. To address your issues...

1. I agree. The dual sabers were much easier to balance than the staffs. However, my experiments indicated that the dual sabers needed a little balancing so that's why I tweaked them a little.

2. The "blue dashing rising slash"? You mean the blue lunge special? Remember that you don't have the Dodge ability while in mid-air. As such, if a player slashes you while you're getup kicking, you'll probably die.

3. Camera bug while being thrown? Please be more specific. Which grapple move are you referring to and what sort of camera bug are you having?

4. So, you're saying that a player can do grapple moves while still remaining mind tricked?

5. Thank you. I'm glad you enjoy it. :)

razorace
02-19-2006, 09:02 PM
JRHockney, you'll be glad to hear that I've implimented the slow bounce/saber impact->mishap concept that we kicked around a bit earlier. However, I should note that it's pretty hard to do vs single saber opponents since all the bounces/returns move the player away from the attack. This is good since we don't want this sort of thing to happen with unskilled attackers. :)

JRHockney*
02-19-2006, 10:29 PM
JRHockney, you'll be glad to hear that I've implimented the slow bounce/saber impact->mishap concept that we kicked around a bit earlier. However, I should note that it's pretty hard to do vs single saber opponents since all the bounces/returns move the player away from the attack. This is good since we don't want this sort of thing to happen with unskilled attackers. :)

Awsome!! :sbdance: Yeah I figured it might be harder with real opponents. You might want ot modify the Tabbots to move away more when they get slow bounced if possible as well, just to make them harder.

I hope go go for the less FP cost for cartwheel, walljump and less FP costing backflip aswell as the absorb kick with backflip next. I sure that backflip one will be tricky.

Also, I just figured out how to modify saber trails!!! I'll email you a version of the "Relatively Perfect Saber: mod that I have made several glow and trail modifications to.

razorace
02-19-2006, 11:13 PM
You might want ot modify the Tabbots to move away more when they get slow bounced if possible as well, just to make them harder.
I don't think it's nessicary, it's hard to do even when they do what they currently do.

I hope go go for the less FP cost for cartwheel, walljump and less FP costing backflip aswell as the absorb kick with backflip next. I sure that backflip one will be tricky.
Oh, I suppose I could look into that stuff next. :)

Also, I just figured out how to modify saber trails!!! I'll email you a version of the "Relatively Perfect Saber: mod that I have made several glow and trail modifications to.
Ok, sure. I'll take a look at it.

Greiver
02-19-2006, 11:24 PM
you dont think that kicking sideways while blocking would be too unfair would you i mean it would really help survival in power duels for the guy on his own


ive been messing with the g_saberanimspeed, g_forceregentime G_dodgeregentime and ive found a really good setup which makes it more fun while not making fights go for exeedingly long, while making it possible for a single person to hold off or if there kinda skilled defeat 2 enemys

g_saberanimespeed 1.25
g_dodgeregentime 500
g_forceregentime 250

i've pound these settings the most enjoyable for me

JRHockney*
02-20-2006, 01:17 AM
you dont think that kicking sideways while blocking would be too unfair would you i mean it would really help survival in power duels for the guy on his own


Hmm, maybe. However I would say that the side that the person is kicking from should still be exposed to slashes. Even then, it might be hard to get the hit detection to where it is fair and not spammable. If you can block completely, that would lead to excessive spamming. Half my kicks end up being side kicks anyways just to confuse and my opponent.

g_saberanimespeed 1.25
g_dodgeregentime 500
g_forceregentime 250

I'll have to try that.

razorace
02-20-2006, 06:19 AM
I've already seen some overuse of the kicks even with the current system. I don't think we could allow kicks and blocking without having the melee nuts run wild with it.

lightofdarkness
02-20-2006, 10:44 AM
Yeah, I meant Kyle_boss's special throw move. In more technical terms, after the throw was initiated the camera turned 180 degrees in the opposite direction of the player model (in my case, I was looking at a wall). It then turned again (180 degrees) to where it was before the throw finished but my model was far away with it's feet facing the camera, I then kicked towards the screen to get up. Probably some stupid lag related bug.

And yes, I was referring to the blue lunge special.

I was referring to the fact that melee while mind-tricking is a tad cheap and a little imbalanced. A hit should reveal a mind-tricking player IMO (who could focus that well after being shot or glanced by a saber?).

JRHockney*
02-20-2006, 04:55 PM
I just found a bug. I noticed that I tend to get stunned alot when my DP is still a little over 50%. It usually happens between 50% and 60% DP. You might want to check the probabilities or the DP scale (or whatever) again for this especially now that parrying is harder to do (which allows for multiple hits on someone who have been forced into a block). Also because of this, you might what to make stuns caused at 40% FP rather than 50% or a little better leeway.

Question: how is the idea about hitting the opponents saber in a slow drawback going to affect dual and staff considering how much easier it will be to hit those styles?

Problem: this is kind of unrelated to saber system stuff but I have been having problems making the dismemberment work. Even trying multiple dismemberment mods still hasn't done anything. I have a feeling is related to a another mod that is conflicting, but I have no idea which one it could be. Any ideas?

Btw Razor, I made the saber glow trail much brighter in the near the core in that saber mod that I set you and resently made some change to the core blur itself. It seems to blend together a lot better now and a little better at low FPS.

razorace
02-20-2006, 05:22 PM
Yeah, I meant Kyle_boss's special throw move. In more technical terms, after the throw was initiated the camera turned 180 degrees in the opposite direction of the player model (in my case, I was looking at a wall). It then turned again (180 degrees) to where it was before the throw finished but my model was far away with it's feet facing the camera, I then kicked towards the screen to get up. Probably some stupid lag related bug.
If I recall, I had to do some weird yaw hacking to get the animations to sync up properly. I imagine I could fix that if it's a major problem, but it would be a hassle to do.

And yes, I was referring to the blue lunge special.
I haven't had any problems with it. the blue lunge is blocked as long as the player has non-critically low DP/FP. If the player is critically low on DP/FP, they will die. It's an intentional finishing move.

I was referring to the fact that melee while mind-tricking is a tad cheap and a little imbalanced. A hit should reveal a mind-tricking player IMO (who could focus that well after being shot or glanced by a saber?).
How is it cheap? You only get one punch/kick/grapple in before you decloak, right?

As for new ideas, I was thinking about how we could retool Rage. My thought was that maybe Rage should dramatically boost your DP/FP regen rates but also keep track of your fighting status (probably in terms of your parries/hits vs the number of hits/parries made on the player), if the player starts to lose, the player panics/losses faith, takes a DP/FP hit, and has reduced regen rates. The idea being that we're simultating a person's rage.

As seen in the movies, Dark Siders have a hard time raging when they're being emotionally confronted or being beaten by a suprior fighter. In addition, this would probably help skilled Dark Siders take on multiple opponents at once.

razorace
02-20-2006, 06:13 PM
I just found a bug. I noticed that I tend to get stunned alot when my DP is still a little over 50%. It usually happens between 50% and 60% DP. You might want to check the probabilities or the DP scale (or whatever) again for this especially now that parrying is harder to do (which allows for multiple hits on someone who have been forced into a block). Also because of this, you might what to make stuns caused at 40% FP rather than 50% or a little better leeway.
That's due to the way the system works. The Block DP is deduced before the stun is performed so in reality any hit that reduces you to 50 DP will leave you open to stun moves. I guess I've been doing it this way since realistically, you spend the effort to block an attack weither you are successful or not. Besides, if mishaps didn't cost DP, you'd actually want them TO happen. :)

I suppose I could reduce the DP threshold a little lower so that you can't normally get stunned while your DP is visually above 50, but that would involve reducing the DP threshold down below 50 as much as the largest DP damage move (which is currently 20). It's really up to you guys.

Question: how is the idea about hitting the opponents saber in a slow drawback going to affect dual and staff considering how much easier it will be to hit those styles?
Staffs/duals have something to fear now? :) Seriously thou, that might help balalnce the duals/staffs.

Problem: this is kind of unrelated to saber system stuff but I have been having problems making the dismemberment work.
Don't use dismemberment mods, they're only designed for SP. Anyway, all you need to set you g_dismember and cg_dismember levels. The OJP_cvars.txt covers what those cvars do.

Btw Razor, I made the saber glow trail much brighter in the near the core in that saber mod that I set you and resently made some change to the core blur itself. It seems to blend together a lot better now and a little better at low FPS.
Uh, ok. Sorry if I'm not totally entheraled by the saber blade issues. I'm of the opinion that the saber blades in the movie varied enough that there's a level of creative license that one can take with the blades and still be "right". I mean, I haven't heard any complaints about how the blaster bolts in the game don't look like the ones in original trilogy. As such, I'm pretty happy with the saber blades as is.

Vruki Salet
02-20-2006, 08:13 PM
Well now that you mention it the blaster bolt thing is a big gripe of mine... lol! but why complain? If I don't like it I'll learn how to change it.

I'd leave the whole blade shape, trail graphic, sound thing alone since practically everyone knows they can just stick in whatever clientside pk3 saber-style mod they want and see what they like on their own screen. There's no need to make some kind of "official OJP saber shape" or something packaged with OJP.

razorace
02-20-2006, 08:28 PM
Yeah, I think that's going to be the official OJP policy until we come up with a blade style/sound selector system..which I don't know when I'll do that.

JRHockney, I've fixed the FP costs for the cartwheels and the backflips like you asked for. It will be in the next release.

JRHockney*
02-20-2006, 11:23 PM
I suppose I could reduce the DP threshold a little lower so that you can't normally get stunned while your DP is visually above 50, but that would involve reducing the DP threshold down below 50 as much as the largest DP damage move (which is currently 20). It's really up to you guys.

Hmm, I think that I would be for reducing it a bit more. It just does not seem like there is a whole lot of leeway right now and if you get combo chained while you've been forced into a block, you pretty much screwed. What does everyone else think?

I have yet to see anyone use the red DFA very effectively and it doesn't seem to do much DP damage when it is. Because of this I think the DP damage should be increased from what ever it is with that and maybe the desann DFA.

I'd leave the whole blade shape, trail graphic, sound thing alone since practically everyone knows they can just stick in whatever clientside pk3 saber-style mod they want and see what they like on their own screen. There's no need to make some kind of "official OJP saber shape" or something packaged with OJP.

Yeah fair enough. I do think that some decent mods should be suggested intially though until a selector can be made (which I don't think is too high on the priority list.

JRHockney, I've fixed the FP costs for the cartwheels and the backflips like you asked for. It will be in the next release.

Excellent, that should help alot. I do still kind of like the idea of the wall springs (where you press jump and the direction of the wall when you standing next to it) costing less as well because its a cool and strategic move. Have you been able to also implement that cool idea you had about using backflip to absorb a kick yet? Thats pure gold in my opinion.

Also, have you or anyone else thought of any new special moves for the the styles that don't have DFA or any special characteristics. I'm a little to busy to think at the moment, but I'll do my best aswell.

JRHockney*
02-21-2006, 02:48 AM
Oooh, I just had an interesting idea to make the single saber styles differ a bit (that doesnt involve DP damage differences......this time).

You could make it so that the single saber styles have differing FP costs for doing special moves and power fakes as well as differing FP and DP% for when mishaps and stuns occur.

It could work like this: Red style (the heaviest) would have the least FP cost of special moves and fakes (other than dual sabers) but it would have mishaps occur at 70 FP and stuns occur around 70% or so DP threshold.

Tavions style (the lightest) would have the most FP cost for special moves and fakes but have mishaps occur at 30 FP and stuns at around 30% DP threshold.

You can fill in the in between yourself logically. This would be an interesting substitute for differing DP damages and still give the inpression of offensive and defensive styles.


Also, here's a quick idea for more variation in the single saber styles that doesn't involve searching around for new animations for new special move (which would be cool too):

Basically, the 3 single saber styles (that don't have an extra special move like desann and red) will have one of their special moves cause slow bounces (or pauses, mishaps, or stuns depending on the DP or FP of the opponent and maybe do some FP damage along with the DP damage. The specials moves based on style would vary like this:

Tavions: Rollstab
Blue: Lunge
Yellow: Arial move

I also think the desann and Red DFAs should have the same characteristic as well. I have this idea set up so that the benefits of a special move can at least be a little familiar based of on the style they can from (well, sort of). It would be your call if you want them to do more DP damage as well. Not that implementing this idea isn't your call in this first place! :p

Oh, one more: Bring back (or in) kick flips! Since they would be more risky and costly than just regular kicks, they couldn't be spammed. In fact, they should do more FP damage than regular kicks. They could also be absorb by backfliping like the regular kick if you implement that idea.

Here's a quick question: You said you implemented the hitting slow bounces idea which is great. Did you make a difference between hitting it with power fakes as opposed to regular swings such as more DP damage or a bigger mishap or something?

OK, thats it for now. Hope you like the suggestions.

razorace
02-21-2006, 04:58 AM
Hmm, I think that I would be for reducing it a bit more. It just does not seem like there is a whole lot of leeway right now and if you get combo chained while you've been forced into a block, you pretty much screwed. What does everyone else think?
mmm, we will see. I think a lot of it is personal taste really.

Have you been able to also implement that cool idea you had about using backflip to absorb a kick yet?
Not yet, but I think I'm much closer after figuring out where the code handles the backflips.

Also, have you or anyone else thought of any new special moves for the the styles that don't have DFA or any special characteristics. I'm a little to busy to think at the moment, but I'll do my best aswell.
DFAs don't do anything special at the moment. I'll have to work on that.