fodev.net
Other => FOnline:2238 Forum => Archives => Suggestions => Topic started by: Alvarez on June 27, 2010, 12:42:13 pm
-
Recently, i noticed that due some circumstances, like high ping, critters would perform their turns in Roundbased combat simultaneously.
I'm sure, that's either a bug, or a silent feature to counter the high ping, and it saved me a lot of time in encounters, by the way. So thanks, if it was intended.
I'd like to suggest this kind of optional Combat Mode - in ordinary Roundbased, you have to wait, till every critter make its individual move, what makes this combat mode quite time-consuming - especially if one critter can't decide, what to do.
By making them spend their APs at one time, it would shorten the time spent in combat and bring more dynamic into the gameplay.
Also, it won't change the effects much - 3 raiders could shoot you simultaneously or one after another: tha damage will be the same, till you're able to make your turn.
-
i love this, you are a genius my friend. Would make combat with a double 20 man strong rave party, as well as a small slaver squad far faster (thats 44 people including me taking turns)
-
Yep, brilliant idea. I wonder is it possible to implement (everyone moving beside you).
-
what about sequence?
-
only your sequence matters in turnbased fights really...
-
only your sequence matters in turnbased fights really...
what do you think this suggestion concerns?
-
jeez, the player plays in modified turnbased, the npcs all take their turn together, i mean, sure, it may have some weakness, but maybe if it is 1 turn per team of people (like a BOS patrol takes their turn together, but right after that a squad of raiders take their turn together, the average Sequence of the NPCs would matter as to which squad takes their turn first. That better, Roachor?
-
The order people go in changes a lot in combat and it would essentially make sequence useless as the group would determine the order not your personal skill.
-
jeez, the player plays in modified turnbased, the npcs all take their turn together, i mean, sure, it may have some weakness, but maybe if it is 1 turn per team of people (like a BOS patrol takes their turn together, but right after that a squad of raiders take their turn together, the average Sequence of the NPCs would matter as to which squad takes their turn first. That better, Roachor?
Oh, wait, i left out the most important bit, each player counts as a team, and the player mercs count as a separate team.
-
Oh, wait, i left out the most important bit, each player counts as a team, and the player mercs count as a separate team.
I thought of something... lets say you encountered 5NCR caravan vs 5 rogues, its 3-4 round and the rogue that is being attacked has 1HP. With the idea of this turn based mode will he shoot or not? because if he had earlier sequence normally, he would shoot somebody and in the proposed here would he shoot or not? I guess not? I mean in the same moment he would need to shoot and get shoted. No problems with animating that?
-
actually, if it is the NCR caravans turn he would probably die, if it is his team's turn he gets to shoot
-
actually, if it is the NCR caravans turn he would probably die, if it is his team's turn he gets to shoot
OH sorry I didnt understand earlier, yes, that makes sense :) actually thats how it was in F2 as I remember...
-
although t would make for a change if the enemy can't find a path to you, or another enemy he would just skip his turn instead of just standing there like an oaf, makes slaver/rave/rave unbearable to fight in turnbased..,.
Speaking of which, vote for me
|
|
|
\/
\/
-
although t would make for a change if the enemy can't find a path to you, or another enemy he would just skip his turn instead of just standing there like an oaf, makes slaver/rave/rave unbearable to fight in turnbased..,.
Mind you, the AI doesn't need to think, it acts reacting on input immediately, e.g. "Target spotted", if i understand the scripting correctly. (May the developers correct me, if i'm wrong)
If nothing happens in next 2 seconds in his FOV or he finds the target unreacheble, the critter should 'decide' to skip its turn or, in case of simultaneous turn, engage the target as long the conditions allow it, until he meets a obstruction in his way, like a player character stopping before the closing door, originally receiving command to run to the destination behind it. (trying to achieve the maximal proximity, the combat range, aborting it after maximal round time, after the desired condition hasn't been met)
That would also shorten the "thinking" in Roundbased, should my first suggestion be rejected.
But now a have a question on devs: does the scripted critter AI give a order on the whole critter bunch as a party, or orders on every single critter, depending on their individual input?
-
5 BOS fighting against 5 raiders
In simultanous combat all of 5 BOS can shoot one raider in the same time killing just him. In turns one will kill one raider, the second when he see that raider is killed he will shoot another etc.
So that suggestion isn't so good
but:
A server don't need to wait till critter move(animations), all actions can be done in milisecs. So we can still have turns but all the critters can move like in simultenaus (it will just look like that)
So we will see that 1st BOS is shooting 1st raiders, 2nd BOS - 2nd raiders etc. in the same time
-
Simply speeding up the combat animations when the target of an action is not the player would be the simplest, and least disruptive of current system, method.
-
Well, another thing needed is to allow doctor in turn based. If you use two handed weapon, you are cripple at the first turn, and you just have to run out to heal...
Maybe one allowed and other allowed all 3 turns, something like that.
-
i'd say 1 doctor attempt every 10 turns, otherwise you'd stall for time.
-
5 BOS fighting against 5 raiders
In simultanous combat all of 5 BOS can shoot one raider in the same time killing just him. In turns one will kill one raider, the second when he see that raider is killed he will shoot another etc.
So that suggestion isn't so good
but:
A server don't need to wait till critter move(animations), all actions can be done in milisecs. So we can still have turns but all the critters can move like in simultenaus (it will just look like that)
So we will see that 1st BOS is shooting 1st raiders, 2nd BOS - 2nd raiders etc. in the same time
As you already stated, the turns could be DECIDED in milliseconds, but how they DONE is just a matter of animation - it will just look simultaneously.
Of course, the Paladins could just decide to fire at the next-best raider in their range at once. The result would be the same.
Also, nothing against FA and Doctor in roundbased mode, but it's a "another thing needed". Otherwise, I'd like to know how it blends in the matter we discussed before.
-
what I would like is for the ghouls to speed up in turnbased mode, as well as the bony scavs in yellow t-shirts, pain in the ass waiting for em to move, it's like sloooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooow.
-
Good idea.
If the time before single critter AP's respawn could be different, we could implement thing like:
time to wait before your AP respawns = 30 - "sequence"/2
-
I like this but only if it's another option alongside the two already in there. It would help us "train up" to Real Time combat when we're used to Turn Based.
-
actually, from what imprezobus says and I understand it means my sniper character will be able to react about 2.5 seconds faster, nice.
-
I like this but only if it's another option alongside the two already in there. It would help us "train up" to Real Time combat when we're used to Turn Based.
Like, 1-2 seconds per AP for a turn? Would surely make one think quickly.
-
Good idea.
If the time before single critter AP's respawn could be different, we could implement thing like:
time to wait before your AP respawns = 30 - "sequence"/2
Dont get it. with 10 PE = 20 seq. 30-10= AP respawns in 20 seconds? what does it mean?
-
every 20 secs you get your AP back to full, instead if an AP oriented respawn
-
every 20 secs you get your AP back to full, instead if an AP oriented respawn
hm, it would look funny, at once everyone shoots everyone, then 20s wait, then again xD Like some prisoner shooting xD
-
not in 20 sec, because 1PE chars would regen in 29 seconds :)
that could also enable first aid/doctor using, because that fixed-time cooldown wouldnt really differ from real-time one.
-
not in 20 sec, because 1PE chars would regen in 29 seconds :)
that could also enable first aid/doctor using, because that fixed-time cooldown wouldnt really differ from real-time one.
Yes I understood :) *waiting for a dev post* :-X
-
sequence is who goes first not how fast they are, pe is totally unrelated.
-
sequence is who goes first not how fast they are, pe is totally unrelated.
Perception affects the Sequence by 2 * PE... ::)
-
Perception affects the Sequence by 2 * PE... ::)
He's talking about PE changing how fast your ap regens
-
well, if we call movement speed basis "sequence" and we call sequence "seq=2*PE" then movement speed basis is PE.
but of course you arent spammer, roachor :)
-
well, if we call movement speed basis "sequence" and we call sequence "seq=2*PE" then movement speed basis is PE.
but of course you arent spammer, roachor :)
*sigh*
Sequence is pretty much your reflex reaction based on noticing first, not your speed while doing things. That's the domain of agility.
-
if current system enables 2x turn when your enemy got much lower sequene, then sequence is bassiccaly: how you react AND how fast you repeat it
-
If i may quote Solar's PM:
So long as combat is calculated unchanged, with the only difference being how its displayed, I don't see anything wrong with it. But its going to be an engine issue and therefore not depenant upon us to put in.
(question)They can be both I believe, depending on which NPC you are talking about. In an encounter they will act independantly.