Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Giftless]

While thinking that Fallout was never meant to be a Real Time game, it got me thinking of a combat system in a game that successfully married real time elements with RPG: Parasite Eve.

To convert FOnline to Parasite Eve style combat would require that, when a player fires their weapon, all AP is consumed. What would follow would be an "evasion" period, where the player would try to dodge enemy fire or seek cover until the AP was recharged for another shot (the rate of the green bubbles recharging would be determined by both AG and the weapon's firing speed, converted from the former AP cost).

Also the targeting system could perhaps be improved, imagine if both the target and the person firing would stop momentarily when the trigger was pulled. With subtle differences like this, one could have more of the tactical situations of turn-based combat while speeding up duller positional activities (such as movement).

I don't know if any of this is possible within the coding, but I do think it would be interesting if players had another option for controlling game time other than the two choices available; especially since the same gangers who kill you with ten shots at once in real time instead die slow and tedious deaths in turn-based. There should be some kind of intermediate time to balance farming, PVP, and leveling needs.


With the "first shot, full AP drain" system, you would see less clicking orgies to get off five shots that would somehow screw up the other players five shots before their clicks can go through. Rather, you would see more of a smooth "click, recharge, click", with aspects more akin to a duel or a dogfight. Players would jockey for position, and the high AP player would still have an advantage in getting off more shots over time.

It might not be so easy to see, but departing from the model of "click-flurries" followed by a refractory period would surely result in a positive change for group combat. Since everyone is essentially "first shot spent" in the same way, players will be better able to adapt to changing battlefield positions (and even new combatants). Not only would it be more difficult to be killed by a first-shot volley (it would take slightly longer to pew), escaping players could not run as quickly from a group if they were targeted multiple times by the aforementioned "freeze frame" weapons effect.

[Sarakin]

The problem is, that when you move, your APs dont regenerate, so you force to players stand still to get advantage of some higher APreg weapons.
What would you get in the end is either camping or using just weapons with big alpha strike and slow regen.

[Opera]

The problem is, that when you move, your APs dont regenerate, so you force to players stand still to get advantage of some higher APreg weapons.
What would you get in the end is either camping or using just weapons with big alpha strike and slow regen.

Think out of the box. Nothing stops you from changing this to fit more the suggested idea. For example, simply make APs regenerate all the time or when you are moving APs regenerate a little slower than when standing still. I'm not saying that one of those would be the best alternative, but if we are thinking about a different combat system that most likely aims to be better/more enjoyable than the current one, we don't have to stick to the old things. Like the way of AP regeneration in this case.

[Roachor]

I think my stamina suggestion would fix all these problems
"
Stamina: When in combat you can only run as many hexes as your endurance allows using a formula based on equipped weapon before you are forced to walk. So 1 handed weapons/2handed weapons/BG  and leather/ca/metal/pa
from longest run to shortest. Stamina points would function similar to ap but be based on endurance instead of agility and only function for movement. Outside of combat running would function normally.
"

[avv]

So what's exactly wrong with the way current pvp is fought other than it highly encourages minmaxing and lacks some cool features we have in modern games?

Your suggestion wouldn't change the combat that much for better or worse. It'd be just different, but still pretty similar.
A real downside would be a massive bonus for crit-based builds because you couldn't make a stable damage doubleburster anymore.

Of course you can always add more "what if" options along with the suggestion, the way Opera did.

[Sarakin]

I dont mind having whole combat system reworked, but whos gonna do it ? We wait months for even a slight adjusment of one number (AC). Not to mention, there are lot of players, who start moaning at every little change that isnt "falloutish"

[DocAN.]

dont like this idea,

[Giftless]

Think out of the box. Nothing stops you from changing this to fit more the suggested idea. For example, simply make APs regenerate all the time or when you are moving APs regenerate a little slower than when standing still. I'm not saying that one of those would be the best alternative, but if we are thinking about a different combat system that most likely aims to be better/more enjoyable than the current one, we don't have to stick to the old things. Like the way of AP regeneration in this case.

You've got the right idea here, and in PE it was exactly like this: Your attack gauge would simply regenerate during the evasion phase. It's only in the current FOnline gameplay that you're forced to take cover (if on the losing end of combat) and then stand still to recharge AP. It's really a double whammy that makes real-time encounters less fluid than they could be.

[Giftless]

I think my stamina suggestion would fix all these problems
"
Stamina: When in combat you can only run as many hexes as your endurance allows using a formula based on equipped weapon before you are forced to walk. So 1 handed weapons/2handed weapons/BG  and leather/ca/metal/pa
from longest run to shortest. Stamina points would function similar to ap but be based on endurance instead of agility and only function for movement. Outside of combat running would function normally.
"

Your idea is decent in its own right; I could see it resulting in more of a Rainbow Six type gameplay where players dart across open spaces and then adopt a more cautious walking speed when peering around corners. In either case, I think we can agree that the real time system could use some tweaking.

[Giftless]

So what's exactly wrong with the way current pvp is fought other than it highly encourages minmaxing and lacks some cool features we have in modern games?

Your suggestion wouldn't change the combat that much for better or worse. It'd be just different, but still pretty similar.
A real downside would be a massive bonus for crit-based builds because you couldn't make a stable damage doubleburster anymore.

Of course you can always add more "what if" options along with the suggestion, the way Opera did.

I think my suggestion would make some difference in combat between dissimilar numbers; right now the "stand and fire" mechanic isn't all that different from the tank controls of old Resident Evil games, which wouldn't be bad in itself except that the mobs you contend with aren't sluggish zombies, rather they're more like the jogger zombies from Dawn of the Dead who lock speeds with you and carry firearms to boot. That's why I say real time combat should be regulated in some small way to better parallel what goes on in turn-based.

[DocAN.]

Edit option?