Quote:

Original post by Kest Chainmail versus bullets is a really great example. Chainmail is a very unique type of armor, having holes in it. Bullets are small enough to pass through some chainmail. So in effect, I can provide random deflection to a point where bullets are sometimes not absorbed by the chainmail at all, and other times completely deflected.

Does chainmail protect against arrows as well? In any case, that's just one extra damage time.

Quote:

I have to agree. I'm one of them. But I also enjoy figuring things out on my own. I don't like the systems where you simply look to see how much your stats are effected before equipping something. I don't like the "Equip Best" buttons. It takes a lot of the fun out of it. Maybe I'll just not have the NPCs at all. Maybe I'll try to come up with interesting gameplay methods that the player can use to discover the abilities of items on their own. Mannequins? Identify skill (which takes you to a seperate screen)? Something.

I don't mind having some vaguness in how effective weapons are; it's just that you will need to provide some feedback to the player as to which weapons are good or bad against different enemy types. It's similar to those RPGs where some monsters have immunity to weapons; you have to make sure the player knows that their weapon is doing no effect (by having their avatar swear, for example). It could also help if you provide either some sort of trainer that tells you which types of weapons are useful against different types of enemies, or at least have it make sense (using flame against wood, for example).

Quote:

Has anyone actually played a game that used complex inner-working attack/defense systems without displaying the details to the player? I have yet to see such a thing.

Yes, many games do. Nearly every FPS these days will have different weapon effectiveness against different types of enemies. RTS games have different rates of effectiveness of different types which usually isn't displayed (how much better an archer is against a footsoldier, for example). Most console RPGs don't tell you by how much a fire attack will damage an ice enemy. Heck, Pokemon has quite a complex weapon damage system buried in its core; the figures aren't shown for that. It depends how "complex" you want to go, though.

I have decided, in the text-based game I am designing, to take away the levels of players, and the increasing HP as well. Basically, everyone gets about the same amount of HP, roughly.

What I left is damage types and armor types, which work in pretty much the same way as rock-paper-scissors. You choose the type of damage you deal, and the type of damage you withstand, and you head out and try to kill something if you fancy it.

But I added another feature. Different attacks for different levels of mastery. These different attacks are either dealing a different type of damage (think a sword slash and a sword stab, or an axe slash, and an axe stab, dealing concussion damage), or dealing a different quantity of damage, or dealing the damage in a different way, to the opponents weapon instead of him directly, making him weaponless if you successfuly destroy his weapon.

On the other hand, I designed the game to allow for different gameplays. You can play the tank, and absorb damage as you please, you can play the canon and deal HEAVY blows, you can play the machinegun, and deal a great amount of blows, not all being effectives, or you can play the poison, and deal your blows very parcimoniously, but with pinpoint accuracy and death-dealing dexterity. Six attributes, a good twenty combat skills, and another good twenty non-combat atributes, combined with a system in which your size and stature affect the way you move, dodge and parry, plus three out of ten possible natural abilities like "lucky", "fast learner", "natural miner" or "fast healer" ensure that the cookie-cutter syndrome remains at bay, and that the players will CHOOSE the way they play.

(Just to let you know, the game is actually being coded, I'll make an anouncement on the boards when something is released, even for alpha testing...)

Have you guys ever seen this?
Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation.

Heh, learn something new every day. I just always assumed it was a name. Note my incorrect spelling (lasors). Anyway, sounds like radiation will give me both my plasma and my energy. Considering the difference in how the ammunition is projected, I think they will both be unique enough.

Quote:

Original post by Trapper Zoid .. it's just that you will need to provide some feedback to the player as to which weapons are good or bad against different enemy types.

Does any game really do this? It would take a heck of a lot of space to describe how effective a weapon is against every enemy type. In the previous games I've played, the only non common-sense method of discovering this is to crack them in the head with it and see what happens. Even then there's sometimes no way to determine (no red numbers pop above their head).

Quote:

Yes, many games do. Nearly every FPS these days will have different weapon effectiveness against different types of enemies.

Yeah, I guess I was thinking more along the lines of armor. Oh well, I think I've reduced the list down quite a bit. There shouldn't be much trouble displaying what I have now. I can also decrease the displayed stats if I want to by not showing stats that are below a certain threshold. For example, if a t-shirt protects against fire by 0.01 (bad example), no need to display that.

Here's the list:

• Low-Velocity ( Large, low velocity projectiles )
  
• High-Velocity ( Small, high velocity projectiles )
  
• Smash ( Blunt force, or high impacts such as explosions )
  
• Slash ( Low force blade slicing, such as with swords or knives )
  
• Stab ( Sharp thrusting, such as with a sword or spear )
  
• Burn ( Scorching from fire )
  
• Shock ( Electricity, such as lightning or an open current )
  
• Radiate ( Radiation )
  
• Optics ( Damage that is absorbed through vision )
  
• Respiratory ( Damage that is breathed in )
  
• Heat ( Temperatures above comfort levels )
  
• Cold ( Temperatures below comfort levels )
  

The names still aren't quite final. I actually only got the count down by one. But I added shock and seperated heat / burn. But the way the inventory information screen will be arranged will make it easier to flow through. It won't just be a cut and dry list.

I'm also considering allowing some armors to convert damage from one type to another. Such as a blade stab into flexible armor, converted to blunt force on contact with that armor. So instead of bleeding to death, you get broken ribs :)

Thanks for all of the help. Totally appreciate it.

[Edited by - Kest on September 4, 2005 2:37:12 PM]

And MASER is the same thing, but with Matter instead of Light. Particle cannons and such.

I think you should carefully consider your projectile damage types. Ballistics guys use the term "terminal ballistics" to describe what happens when a bullet or other projectile actually hits a target. The effect can probably be described with some of the other damage types you discuss, like "smash" and "stab". You might want to cull those from the list, and let them be hybrids, second-order damage types.

Will you have combo damage types? A .45 caliber handgun, for instance, might do both smashing impact damage and stabbing penetrating damage damage. A decent bullet-resistant vest ("bulletproof" is no longer used, for insurance reasons) will stop the bullet from penetrating, but it still gives you a bruise that you'll remember. On the other hand, if it hits you in a soft, fleshy part of your body, like a love handle, it might pass through without imparting much of its kinetic energy to you, but it'll still drill a tiny little hole into your body, which leads to bleeding and shock and what-have-you. Armor might be able to reduce certain types of damage, or even eliminate them, but other types will filter through and hurt you.

I don't know if you're going to model this kind of thing, but "shock" and "blood loss" and "excruciating pain" are big factors in the effectiveness of many weapons. Handgun rounds, for instance, seldom do enough actual damage to the human body to stop somebody physically. Pain, fear and alarm incapacitate the target more quickly and effectively than tissue damage or blood loss do. That why suspects hopped up on barbiturates are such a terrible threat to policemen. You have to either damage their central nervous system or crush enough of their joints that they can't effectively get around.

I think at least "shock" and "pain" should be included, because so much of the effectiveness of inhaled munitions (like tear gas) is dependent upon these reactions, and because that sort of thing could be "levelled" with training and experience, so your badass Rambo guy can shrug off a flesh wound that might have stopped a lesser warrior, even though he wasn't armored.

And if you're going to use terminology like "flak vest", do a lot of research on what exactly you're referring to. Some posts here have addressed a few erroneous assumptions, and others have speculated on different ideas, but you need to do some cramming before you misuse a term. Like "clip". Ugh.

Quote:

Original post by Iron Chef Carnage And MASER is the same thing, but with Matter instead of Light. Particle cannons and such.

Actually, the M in MASER stands for microwave. It's very similar to a laser, just with a different frequency of wavelength.

Quote:

Original post by Iron Chef Carnage I think you should carefully consider your projectile damage types. Ballistics guys use the term "terminal ballistics" to describe what happens when a bullet or other projectile actually hits a target. The effect can probably be described with some of the other damage types you discuss, like "smash" and "stab". You might want to cull those from the list, and let them be hybrids, second-order damage types.

I realize that my list is not accurate as far as science goes. I just want to emphasise again how important simplicity is. If I end up having primary and secondary damage types, where does electric come in? What is electric stabbing? Large projectiles represent low velocity stabbing. Large blunt projectiles (rocks?) can use blunt force. Although I see a lot of potential for splitting spear stabs from arrow stabs, I can't see much for round projectile smashes versus a club smash.

A bullet can still bypass armor that stops bullets by increasing its damage value for that damage type. The armor will stop what it can, then the rest continues to the next armor layer. The amount of damage that passes through an armor will damage it (although there are settings to prevent this for individual damage types). Eventually skin is reached. Skin is just like armor, but damage it absorbs effects the character's abilities and health.

Quote:

Will you have combo damage types? A .45 caliber handgun, for instance, might do both smashing impact damage and stabbing penetrating damage damage.

Yes, but not in the way you're describing. Smashing will represent damage that does not enter the material - it just smashes against it. Stabbing represents large objects attempting to stab through the material. The projectile types are literally limited to arrow and bullet type objects.

But they can be combined. Plasma will burn, shock, and radiate, for example. Explosions will apply smashing and burning at once. Weapons can also specify a base damage type. If so, and the base damage is stopped by armor, the remaining damages are stopped without being filtered.

Quote:

I don't know if you're going to model this kind of thing, but "shock" and "blood loss" and "excruciating pain" are big factors in the effectiveness of many weapons.

I hadn't thought about it. I like the idea, but I'm not sure how this type of effect could be applied to the player. He's in direct control of the character. The only way to make him enter shock would be to remove that control.

Quote:

I think at least "shock" and "pain" should be included, because so much of the effectiveness of inhaled munitions (like tear gas) is dependent upon these reactions

I was actually planning to make it just cause temporary dismay. AI characters would grab their face and stumble around. The player would just be unable to attack - perhaps because he's covering his mouth and nose. If I force him to stumble around, I might as well make it kill him. The AI will make sure the same result occurs. Sleepy gas is another story. I can't imagine how I could allow the player to become unconscious. Unless the AI just leaves him alone and the game skips to the waking point. I'm gonna have to think about that. Deus Ex just made the stuff kill you! Now I know why.

Quote:

And if you're going to use terminology like "flak vest", do a lot of research on what exactly you're referring to. Some posts here have addressed a few erroneous assumptions, and others have speculated on different ideas, but you need to do some cramming before you misuse a term. Like "clip". Ugh.

I didn't use the terminology :)
I do the research, though. And I admit I haven't done nearly all that I need, yet. I'm missing your point with the 'clip' term, though. Clip as in a gun clip? Or being clipped by bullets?

I think he means gun clip.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/forensic-science/message/7767
http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1323705

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clip
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magazine_%28firearm%29

That's interesting. Thanks for those links.

What's funny is that tons of English words and meanings are derived from dumb errors like this. A good example is "Fragged". It originally was simply a grenade. But soldiers started calling the act of being killed by such a device as fragged. Now it can just mean getting killed at all. It can even mean you're 'screwed' - no hope. It would be ammusing to see how our language transforms over ten or so generations.

I like the system you describe.

I'm wondering if it might be okay to incapacitate the player character without actually killing him. You said above that if you're going to ruin him combat effectiveness, you may as well kill him. But really, if ruining his ability to fight is enough, why bother killing him? A sound crack on the back of the head might knock him senseless, effectively ending the fight, but it needn't actually make him die.

Less-lethal munitions are a burgeoning field right now, as police and military personnel realize that death isn't always the best or easiest way to neutralize a threat. If you saw the Jackass movie, you know how thoroughly wrecked a man can be by a beanbag from a shotgun. I've been hit with police pepper spray in the course of my own training, and others I know have been hit with stun guns, and I'll tell you that these things end fights as decisively as bullets when they're effective.

In crowd control situations, a few tear gas cannisters can bring order faster and more humanely than machinegun fire and fragmentation grenades can. Not to mention they're cheaper.

Again, I'm not sure quite what your game will be, but being ruined by tear gas or a really hard punch in the nose can end the game the same as a bullet can.

If you've played Morrowind, you know that getting caught picking someone's pocket when you're dead on your feet from fatigue can lead to you being beaten to death by a female shopkeeper. That's seriously embarrassing.

I think, that balancing such an in-depth system is going to be a GIANT pain in your backside, but I guess that's your burden to tote around, and will inevitably be mine when I ever get around to actually finishing a project...

Anyway, I like the idea of multiple damage types on weapons, it always bugged me that I could only do "slice" damage with my sword even though I should be fully capable of impaling my enemy upon it depending upon which "attack" I was using at any given time.

Also, in the case of explosives, don't forget that there will undoubtedly be shrapnel thrown by the blast, so even if it's dirt and rocks or sharp scraps of metal, there will be further "piercing"/"stabbing"/"whatever" damage from it (in addition to the fire, concussion, aural and perhaps optic damage). If you're going for a certain level of detail, might as well make sure you do it right :).

Anyway, as Carnage said previously, non-lethal combat can also be a very interesting part of a game, especially if it could be used in an "arena" sort of side-game instead of just absolutely blocking the ability of the character to die as has been done in games past.

Anyway, I think that's all I had to add. Good luck with the system, sounds like it will be a blast to play.

Vopisk