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

[Nice_Boat]

What's with this "made for a singleplayer game" bullshit one keeps hearing every now and then? SPECIAL is based on GURPS almost to a degree it could be called a blatant ripoff. Actually, GURPS would be used if not for all the gore in the game. Oh, and the system worked in Tactics with very little modification. It's not a singleplayer thingie, it's just a set of rules made with an rpg game in mind. Obviously, you could use the dice and this particular set of rules to settle things both in NPC-PC and PC-PC relations. Besides, most people complain about the system being too lethal - hey, is that really a trait of a singleplayer game?

Oh, and "impossible to defend" and "PvP being all luck/too easy"? That's quite funny since PvP's been dominated by exactly SAME FRIGGIN' PEOPLE since early 2009 and somehow I didn't see avv or Izual among them It's nothing personal, it's just mind boggling when people who lack the credentials say stuff like that. Actually PvP is not about luck in the slightest degree - it's about teamwork and positioning. So yeah, you can both defend and assault and there's a world of difference between the two. Anyway, there are a few things one has to remember while discussing FOnline combat mechanics.

First of all, combat in 2238 is very fast when it comes to movement. Maps are relatively small, it takes a few seconds to leave or drastically change positions. This requires very high lethality when it comes to sorting out the effects of the attacks to hope for decisive fights - if you can't kill (or knockdown, the practical implications are more or less the same) the target in a single, full AP barrage, he's going to run away. It's just that simple. Now, you could increase survivability while decreasing mobility, for example disabling the ability to run while in combat... and what do we get that way? Yes, ladies and gentlemen, we get TLA. And I'm more than sure most people agree that combat in 2238 is far more tactical than out there. In TLA your tactical skills, coordination etc. could totally suck, but quite often you could still win because of your build, level difference etc. On 2238 everyone more or less has a chance and smart play/player skill are rewarded to a much greater extent - and I really hope it stays that way.

Another thing is defence vs assault. Right now there's little to no reason to defend - you have less situational awareness then the attacker, it's harder to coordinate and pulling off a successful ambush has more to do with counterattacking at the right moment than actually catching your enemy in the crossfire. There's no need to use any sort of fixed positions, because they can be easily bypassed and you get quickly filled full of led if you don't keep moving... so I'm all for introducing some sort of AC bonus (could be pretty friggin' high, honestly) when standing inside a building next to a window or something like that. It just shouldn't be overdone or end up being the decisive factor, or else we'd be stuck with something in line with Close Combat games, but without suppression and morale (which were the things that made it work).

[Attero]

its strange to call it tactics when you control only one character - it needs to be extanded to group fight. And most players rly look at PvP in 1v1 situations or some encounters with no osbtacles...

I agree on the fact that game is unfriendly for defending - part points Boat mentioned there is fact that power chars are bade around drug using . On offensie you just take drugs and attack. When defending you dont rly know when to take them  , if you take them in combat you vritaully waste waste time on eatign al lthe shit you need ... if you take it too early then you will have to fight with penalties making you almost useless

As for saying devs & GMs opinion dotn count coz they dont do PvP , mind me but they can watch other fights and you dont know about it. Also what was said ealier "PvP" is more about power builds and non everyone have time and will to build one and bunch of chars to support it

[Surf]

As for saying devs & GMs opinion dotn count coz they dont do PvP , mind me but they can watch other fights and you dont know about it. Also what was said ealier "PvP" is more about power builds and non everyone have time and will to build one and bunch of chars to support it

"They" do alot of testing combat chars and abilities.
Just because you don't see them doing so it doesn't mean they don't do it.

[avv]

What's with this "made for a singleplayer game" bullshit one keeps hearing every now and then? SPECIAL is based on GURPS almost to a degree it could be called a blatant ripoff. Actually, GURPS would be used if not for all the gore in the game. Oh, and the system worked in Tactics with very little modification. It's not a singleplayer thingie, it's just a set of rules made with an rpg game in mind.

Fallouts and fonline have differend goals. In fallouts the ultimate goal was to finish the game, you could do it as a char who coulnd't fight at all and that was cool. But in fonline there's no goal, or at least the goal can't be to play as loser who dies when he meets hostilities. A speech powerbuild cannot persuade another char to kill himself or lay down his weapons. Fallout tactics had good combat system, but there was nothing else to do than fight so everyone was combat "powerbuild".

Oh, and "impossible to defend" and "PvP being all luck/too easy"? That's quite funny since PvP's been dominated by exactly SAME FRIGGIN' PEOPLE since early 2009 and somehow I didn't see avv or Izual among them It's nothing personal, it's just mind boggling when people who lack the credentials say stuff like that.

Yeh no offense taken, I've been waiting for real pvp players to participate in this discussion anyway.

In TLA your tactical skills, coordination etc. could totally suck, but quite often you could still win because of your build, level difference etc. On 2238 everyone more or less has a chance and smart play/player skill are rewarded to a much greater extent - and I really hope it stays that way.

Everyone with powerbuild that is.

Another thing is defence vs assault. Right now there's little to no reason to defend - you have less situational awareness then the attacker, it's harder to coordinate and pulling off a successful ambush has more to do with counterattacking at the right moment than actually catching your enemy in the crossfire. There's no need to use any sort of fixed positions, because they can be easily bypassed and you get quickly filled full of led if you don't keep moving... so I'm all for introducing some sort of AC bonus (could be pretty friggin' high, honestly) when standing inside a building next to a window or something like that. It just shouldn't be overdone or end up being the decisive factor, or else we'd be stuck with something in line with Close Combat games, but without suppression and morale (which were the things that made it work).

Doesn't sound all that bad. Counter to high ac cover positions could be forced fire with explosives, rockets and flamer, you could smoke enemies out of their bunkers.

In addition it would provide tactical possibilites if you had full sprint, gun ready walk and overwatch position. Full sprint means that you can run fast but it takes longer to deploy your gun and shoot. Walking with gun ready means that you can shoot faster when encountering an enemy but you're slower. Overwatch means that you shoot almost instantly when meeting an enemy, but you got tunnel vision, you're stationary and cannot see your flank or rear.  Then guns could have differend features depending on how fast they shot and what kind of fields of view they provided. For example scoped rifle is accurate, but you get narrowed field of view when in overwatch position. Shotgun is very fast to shoot when you encounter an enemy. Support guns are slow to deploy but you can shoot very long and hold positions.

This was something that fallout tactics lacked. It had various guns and stances, but all guns shot immediately and dealt huge instant damage and every char had 360 field of view in overwatch mode.

[Nice_Boat]

Everyone with powerbuild that is.

Well, I don't know. You could always go with 6LK more crit, better crit and you're pretty effective with a small gun. In my opinion it's not as bad as people make it sound. Maybe it's something about PvP players being pack animals and crafters usually fighting when they're alone? With the buffed crits I wouldn't say killing someone takes that much of effort character-wise, so if you manage to surprise your opponent (flank him, pull the gun on him first etc.) you should be pretty well off. I've had a funny screwup when I ambushed a miner with plasma grenades and didn't get him on the first two due to lag - he just ran a bit ahead out of my range and instakilled me. I bet there are tons of stories like that floating around. That's why I like instakills and high lethality in general - it keeps everyone dangerous. With combat relying on stats too much crafter builds are simply inferior to powerbuilds and there's no ammount of skill that could even things out.

Doesn't sound all that bad. Counter to high ac cover positions could be forced fire with explosives, rockets and flamer, you could smoke enemies out of their bunkers.

In addition it would provide tactical possibilites if you had full sprint, gun ready walk and overwatch position. Full sprint means that you can run fast but it takes longer to deploy your gun and shoot. Walking with gun ready means that you can shoot faster when encountering an enemy but you're slower. Overwatch means that you shoot almost instantly when meeting an enemy, but you got tunnel vision, you're stationary and cannot see your flank or rear.  Then guns could have differend features depending on how fast they shot and what kind of fields of view they provided. For example scoped rifle is accurate, but you get narrowed field of view when in overwatch position. Shotgun is very fast to shoot when you encounter an enemy. Support guns are slow to deploy but you can shoot very long and hold positions.

This was something that fallout tactics lacked. It had various guns and stances, but all guns shot immediately and dealt huge instant damage and every char had 360 field of view in overwatch mode.

With a proper interface it could work pretty well. Shift + click - full sprint, normal click - gun ready, stationary for 2-3 seconds - overwatch. Tunnel vision would require really precise and fluid turning mechanics (if you press a your character's vision ALWAYS follows the attack cursor). But then again this'd require suppression mechanics and forced fire. I'm not sure if that wouldn't be taking it a bit too far. I mean, firefights would be more realistic, yeah, but you'd end up with shooting TONS of ammunition to fix the enemy and advance, so crafting would have to be totally rebalanced. That's why I said it would be problematic if cover mechanics were to be made the defining factor in battle.

Besides remember that those mechanics would promote squad tactics far more than the current ones do. You'd need someone to lay down base of fire, you'd need completely different weapons/skills to maneuver and deliver a kill etc. There's already enough whine associated with combat being too heavy on teamwork, and I guess that being a BG character that's useless aside from providing covering fire and can't do much lone-wolf style would piss even the most hardcore military buffs out there off.

I think we should just start small and introduce something more in line with what we have right now. Something like crouched and prone stances that influence your movement speed and give you AC bonus and receiving AC bonus from using cover (windows, wells, etc.). Throw forced fire for area weapons into the mix (grenade room clearing techniques, hell yeah) and we've got ourselves combat that's tied to the terrain a bit more without turning everything concerning fighting upside down. After it's implemented we could think about more fancy stuff - and ask ourselves whether we want it or not at that point.

[Colombo]

when character would stand near obstacle, he would get bonus (after some time) to DR? To simulate cover and defensive position.

[Nice_Boat]

when character would stand near obstacle, he would get bonus (after some time) to DR? To simulate cover and defensive position.

Well, I think that cover shouldn't make you tougher, it should make you harder to hit (so AC bonus, not anything resistance-related). It'd mean that the enemy has to come closer to engage you effectively when you're hiding behind a window or crouching behind a cart, giving you a few extra shots if they go human wave instead of flanking. That's enough to make smart defenders start planning for killzones, overlapping areas of fire etc. Increased DR would just make you a bit tougher, something critical-based weapon users wouldn't probably even notice

[Colombo]

yeah, but it has to be so high bonus to make any efect. I am new player, don't know mutch about realy hardcore PvP and know only few PvP builds, but each is maxing their weapon skill to have 95 percent to hit, no matter what enemy is wearing, no matter if he is shooting to eye, no matter how far away he is. So if even with great cover enemy would have 95% to shoot me, I would rather go with DR.

[Nice_Boat]

yeah, but it has to be so high bonus to make any efect. I am new player, don't know mutch about realy hardcore PvP and know only few PvP builds, but each is maxing their weapon skill to have 95 percent to hit, no matter what enemy is wearing, no matter if he is shooting to eye, no matter how far away he is. So if even with great cover enemy would have 95% to shoot me, I would rather go with DR.

Well, that's why it has to be a large AC bonus, along the lines of 30 or even 50. And if someone wants to make a dedicated sniper to remove opponents from behind obstacles 50 hexes away, by all means let him max his SG up to 300.

[avv]

Well, I don't know. You could always go with 6LK more crit, better crit and you're pretty effective with a small gun. In my opinion it's not as bad as people make it sound.

Sniper/crafter is possible, same goes with many other crafter-fighters. But the fact still remains that the game strongly encourages to make chars able to do one thing very well because the potential is so high. The game has to encourage players to make chars which can do about 2-3 things well so that they aren't too tempted to use alts and ruin pvp by caracterbuild arms race.

With the buffed crits I wouldn't say killing someone takes that much of effort character-wise, so if you manage to surprise your opponent (flank him, pull the gun on him first etc.) you should be pretty well off.

How to recognize your opponent? Surely it would be easy solution to just blast everybody with p90 that comes across unsafe mine or wasteland, but surely we players should be allowed to choose between right and wrong. You could say it's a matter of survival and name of the game to shoot everyone just in case, but then best way to survive is to avoid fights.

There's already enough whine associated with combat being too heavy on teamwork, and I guess that being a BG character that's useless aside from providing covering fire and can't do much lone-wolf style would piss even the most hardcore military buffs out there off.

This big guns dude could be first of all decent fist fighter due to his strength and everyone with ability to use a gun, should have at least some ability to use all guns in general. So this big gunner would prefer shotguns and smgs when he's not providing support fire for his squad. Assault rifles should be jacks of all trades and suitable for all, just like ak47 is the ultimate all rounder.

I think we should just start small and introduce something more in line with what we have right now. Something like crouched and prone stances that influence your movement speed and give you AC bonus and receiving AC bonus from using cover (windows, wells, etc.). Throw forced fire for area weapons into the mix (grenade room clearing techniques, hell yeah) and we've got ourselves combat that's tied to the terrain a bit more without turning everything concerning fighting upside down. After it's implemented we could think about more fancy stuff - and ask ourselves whether we want it or not at that point.

Along with enemy-recognization system and powerbuild-balance, it sounds good.

[Colombo]

Well, that's why it has to be a large AC bonus, along the lines of 30 or even 50. And if someone wants to make a dedicated sniper to remove opponents from behind obstacles 50 hexes away, by all means let him max his SG up to 300.

Yeah. And the one with 120 would hit nothing at all. So players had to minmax again.

[Nice_Boat]

How to recognize your opponent? Surely it would be easy solution to just blast everybody with p90 that comes across unsafe mine or wasteland, but surely we players should be allowed to choose between right and wrong. You could say it's a matter of survival and name of the game to shoot everyone just in case, but then best way to survive is to avoid fights.

Just know them by names No, seriously, namecolorizing is good enough, I think that making it any easier would spoil the suspense factor for some people (including me). I just love how tense some encounters can get when both players meet in unexpected circumstances and aren't really sure whether they want to shoot first or not and are pondering how to get out of the situation without risking too much. Definitely some of the best moments I've had with the game.

This big guns dude could be first of all decent fist fighter due to his strength and everyone with ability to use a gun, should have at least some ability to use all guns in general. So this big gunner would prefer shotguns and smgs when he's not providing support fire for his squad. Assault rifles should be jacks of all trades and suitable for all, just like ak47 is the ultimate all rounder.

Hm, I'd much rather see the LSW and perhaps M-60 usable almost as immediately as the assault rifle. I mean it's not even that unrealistic, you could very well shoot SAW type weapons from the hip or from the shoulder while standing in CQB. You're not going to be as accurate as with a rifle, but it's already modeled in the game I guess.

Yeah. And the one with 120 would hit nothing at all. So players had to minmax again.

120 is awfully low. 180 is the minimum if you want to fight and I don't see anything wrong with that - it's not that many skill points anyway. You could easily get 180+ SG and max another skill to 300 with 10 INT skilled.

[Frosti]

First post

This thread is about what direction and basics our pvp system should include

For now PvP in FOnline 2238 is "1 shot". You die in 1-3 shots from PvP power builds. Many players like this, and many players do not like this. And looks like this will stay 1 shot style.

I myself dont like 1 shot style PvP. In my opinion demage from weapons should be completly changed, lowered demage, critical damage nerfed, ammo type vs armor type should be very important.
There should be one battle mode ( not mixed real time/turn based) with reduced to minimum player dextarity needed to battle ( no running and gunning to avaid demage) and more depended on your character statistics and tactical move like in pure turn based mode.

As said many times before Fallout critical hits and weapons was not meant to used aganist other players. Game model was not made for 'real time' mode as it is in FOnline - this leads to disbalance in game mechanic.

This is how I would see FOnline. PvP as it is now with "1 shot" is liked by some players and good for them. However if there would be initiative annouced on forum for testing rebalanced weapons and criticals I would take part in them.

[avv]

Just know them by names No, seriously, namecolorizing is good enough, I think that making it any easier would spoil the suspense factor for some people (including me). I just love how tense some encounters can get when both players meet in unexpected circumstances and aren't really sure whether they want to shoot first or not and are pondering how to get out of the situation without risking too much. Definitely some of the best moments I've had with the game.

I know what you mean, and there's nothing like re-match with red tagged dude because he no longer gets the advantage of surprise. However there's no way to keep up with all playerkillers and give them justice. A bad dude always gets the first shot when he meets a nice guy. On the other hand we're discussing here how to make combat less dependent on first strike, so it could be fixed on its own.

Hm, I'd much rather see the LSW and perhaps M-60 usable almost as immediately as the assault rifle. I mean it's not even that unrealistic, you could very well shoot SAW type weapons from the hip or from the shoulder while standing in CQB. You're not going to be as accurate as with a rifle, but it's already modeled in the game I guess.

But then we'd face the same problem as fallout tactics had: big guns outgunned smallguns in late game. Because shots were launched immediately when enemy was spotted, a m60 was always better in everything than ak47. It was sad because all those shotguns and low tier smallguns were cool. This means that small guns would be good only in sniping and big guns would dominate close range.

Here's a sligthly off topic point of view:
Israelis had advantage over soldiers of Egypt in six day war (or was it yom kippur, shit can't remember) because Israelis had uzis and egypt had ak47. When assaulting bunkers being able to turn your gun fast held important role. Since uzi was closer to your body, it was faster to turn and it outmatched ak47 in close quarters.

Also imagine Tunnel Rats in vietnam with m60. They used pistols and knives for a reason.

Either big gun dudes are stuck with their long guns and do good only in the open, or they can use some small guns too when situation demands or we stick to the current way where big guns just dominate close range and that's that.

[iicca]

Besides, you represented your Jagged Allience related idea below, which surely is unfalloutish in every way. So what you do is to draw your "unfalloutish" card when it suits you.

You really have some kind of a syndrome to always try to be right and find flaws on peoples opinions. If you
actually would have read the text properly you would have noticed this:

 But that is Jagged Alliance, I don't want fallout to be like that. Instead:

So really you are not making a good picture of yourself to anyone.

Besides, where is it even stated that fonline must be faithful to some old role play game? What if someone brought up a superb idea that wasn't faithful to fallout, should we just scrap it because of that?

"some old rpg" It's not some old rpg, It is GURPS and it's still played all over the world. You really don't have a clue what fallout is about.
Respect gone, forever.

Doesn't sound too bad honestly. So what you're saying is that shooting big guns cost less AP if you got lots of str. Striking with knife or shooting with pistol costs less if you got lots of AGI?

Basically yes, but no. Read my post again, I don't want to repeat my self.

Either big gun dudes are stuck with their long guns and do good only in the open, or they can use some small guns too when situation demands or we stick to the current way where big guns just dominate close range and that's that.

Forcing people to choose classes wont fix that you know?

Solution.

Big guns have med range, cost alotmof ap to fire, reduced to hit value at short range
Smg sized weapons have short range and cost less ap to fire
Sniper weapons have very long range, cost alot of ap to fire, have highly reduced to hit value on short ranges becouse of scope.

Now we have rock paper and scissors

Big guns dominate SMG's at med range and short
SMG's dominate Sniper weapons and big guns at short range
Sniper weapons dominate everyone at long range, but lack at short and medium range.

It wont be as simple as that, everything is weapon dependant but you get the point. When going with a party to some pvp you will always
need all kind of builds becouse none is more dominant in each situation. It is always possible that snipers will dominate open ground and
long streets. But Then short range weapons need to get smart and outmanouver the sniper. Big guns are there to do what they are ment to do. support. Everyone would have a role in pvp fights. It's realistic and increases the immersion of that you area actually usefull in something.

So really the classes will solve nothing.

We also need overhaul on AC, becouse why the hell does anykind of armor make you less likely to get hit?
AC should be very high on guys with no armor. And guys in Power Armor should have no AC at all.
Armor should only affect in DR only. This would also make hand to hand builds viable.

-

After all things can be solved more easily than just making dreams of complicated and "balanced" systems.
PVP will never be extremely well balanced. Not in any world. There is too many modifiers to actually make things balanced.