Few questions I''d like to post: Combat (unarmed or/and armed) I''d like to know all the different elements (pretty much everything I or you or we can come up with) 1) Two opponents engage, what determines who gets to hit first?(first strike) 2) What determines if a strike hits? 3) What determines the amount of damage done? 4) What determines who gets to strike next? I''ll fill in some answers that I think I''ve come up with so far I) The more aggressive one probably gets to hit first (I guess you can somewhat call that initiative) It probably also depends on the fighting style, where some styles will wait to see what the other does (like Aikido which tends to use the opponent''s moves to its own advantage) II) The skill of the attacker with the weapon he uses The skill of the defender with the weapon he uses The skill of the attacker against the weapon the defender uses The skill of the defender against the weapon the attacker uses The weapons used (I bet certain weapons fair better against some weapons than against other) III) The type of hit (full hit, glance etc) The location of the hit (head, torse, arm etc) The protection of the defender (armor) The force of the hit (strength) IIII) Okay, this is a tricky one. I imagine a real swordfight. A gets to strike first because of his aggression. B deflects the strike. But now, does B get to hit next, or does A get to hit again? What factors determine who gets to hit next? Because I''d love to see a swordfight on the computer where the opponents actually exchange blows, forcing their opponent into a defensive stand, then all of a sudden seeing the fight change as the defender suddenly gets the chance to counterstrike. The person to get to strike next is probably the one who performs the best move in the first strike. If the attacker gets a solid first strike, he''ll probably be able to strike again before the defender can strike, which forces the defender even more to merely defend, giving up any attack options (even though I didn''t think Salvatore''s Drizzt books works of art, I did appreciate the swordsplay scenes). The defender would be hard pressed, but the attacker would have to keep hitting perfectly (and the defender matching those hits with perfect dodges and parries) to make sure the defender stays on the defense. The defender would just look for that one mistake, the opening he needs to counterstrike. Any suggestions on possible ways to reflect this on a computer?

My thoughts...

I)
Type/Length of weapon. Some one with a staff could strike someone with a dagger before they came into range.
Orientation of the opponants to each other (I guess)

II)
Do u include shields under weapons? you probaby should they''re hand held (or at least mobile)
Agility or dexterity (or something like that) of both (although that''s probably covered somewhat in skill)

III)
Again the type of weapon (and how it hit. Stab, slash, etc)

IV)
The sucess of the attack, and how the defender defended it.
E.g. If the defender dodged the blow, by crouching he''s probably going to be able to hack his opponants legs. If the attacker managed to hit the defender with some force then he''s going to be able to strike again b4 the defender can recover. If the defender has two weapons he can parry with one and strike with the other.
It also depends on the weapons they are using, if the defender uses one end of the staff to defend from a sword blow he may be able to bring the other end of the staff arround for an attack.
Really i think its all dependent on who can get thier weapon moving for an attack first. (and do they want to?)



NightWraith

I. quickness(physical and mental-they have to recognize things too)
II. skill against victims evasion/defenses
III. strength vs victim toughness(strength), area, type of blow
IV. whoever gets the swing up next(ie player A takes .3 seconds to swing, B takes .31 seconds... each attacks when they can, not relative to others. getting hit will probably add time to your next swing.)


--I don''t judge, I just observe
Stuck in the Bush''s, Florida

ok here goes:

I) call it initiative, a number determined by size, agility and perception (he who sees can react better) of the character, modified by armor (weight), type (again weight) of weapon and some random number.

ÌI)all mentioned before

III)additionally: type of weapon (mass and damage type: piercing, slashing, blunt...vs various armor types),

IV)again initiative, i like wraiths thoughts... with weapons of about equal size and mass you get 1-1 combinations, i think this would be the norm...
PROBLEM: initiative doesn´t really matter much anymore as it´s just trading blows
if we´re talking single player game here how about making fights slower if the character is faster(high initiative), that way faster characters would have an edge.
Better yet, to balance this you could make the combat speed (the clock) dependent on the perception of your character (or maybe some fighting skill as well), and the movement/attack speed based on his agility/size/whatever.
then you could have a big, slow brute who´s good at anticipating his opponents movement and can put his blows where they hurt most.
hope i mades om e sense

its all about speed. if "A" is faster than "B" then "A" will get more hits in. but "B" will hit when he can. So "A" takes so long to comprehend every action, and "B" does too. But how long will depend. I suggest never actully making speed stats... and let the computer processing time do that for you.

If you want something really realistic...

Consider the position of the characters heads. actaully have the eyes look at different parts of the body. This will take lots of CPU power but will be real realistic. make each char react when they see an object coming at them fast. also make the char less reactive to objects out side of focus. so make a "movementseen" value. goes up as the object moves faster, but goes down as the object is farther out of range. the harder the character... the bigger "focus" he has. and basically the char will act to block what ever has the highest "movementseen" value. even if it is not the fastest object (the fastest object may be somewhat out of focus from the eyes and therefore the movementseen value will decrease).

See where im going??

so basically it would be easy to trick an "lowfocus" character. All you do is attack so that the char turns his head and then its an open shot. A more "focused" player would be harder. you would have to trick them constantly until you could land a combo just perfectly.

Also you can make a small error value. so one out of 100, the char makes a wrong move. see waht i mean. ill explain it better fi you want me too. there are a couple probs with this but ill write them later.(you can probably figure out a few probs yourself)

-----------------------------
I''m almost finished my 3D Engine for the TI-83 calculator

sounds interesting, but i think it´s ultimately unnecessary. YOu can get just as much fun if you put all that into one variable and do a few random die rolls...
it´s just not really feasible to simulate life, a good imitation will do just as well... (and is waaaay cheaper)

yeah that seems like how most games do it. a fighting simulater isnt gonna work with todays CPUs. just have an integer holding the distance range and throw in some random moves. thats how i would do it.

-----------------------------
I''m almost finished my 3D Engine for the TI-83 calculator

you might want to also track endurance/stamina. people can''t just keep swinging and swinging. fighting is tiring. more fatigue, less powerful blows, slower reactions


--I don''t judge, I just observe
Stuck in the Bush''s, Florida

Here''s an interesting site on swordfighting:

http://www.thehaca.com/essays.htm


Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.
What a plight we who try to make a story-based game have...writers of conventional media have words, we have but binary numbers

I''ve always prefered games that use fatigue/stamina as a hit ratio counter. it just seems more realistic to me and a lot more fun to have to focus on keeping your stamina up.