Fighting and dragging

[AlchemicRaker]

http://cantr.darknovagames.com/attack.html

Went ahead and made this, for anyone who needs to calculate attack damage and stuff for estimates.

I'm thinking about new attack systems so I made this, might as well share it

It is crude but it works...

- Natso

[Piscator]

I believe the effectiveness of shields depends on the same factors weapon damage does. To calculate the damage accurately you would also have to take the defenders skill, strength, health and tiredness into account.

[AlchemicRaker]

I believe the effectiveness of shields depends on the same factors weapon damage does. To calculate the damage accurately you would also have to take the defenders skill, strength, health and tiredness into account.

Ahh, well I don't know anything about that. All I know is whats from that one post.

- Natso

[Cdls]

Skill weighting and skill do not affect the chance to hit. They are the same for everybody. Chance to hit is 80% and chance for defender to block is 70%. It would make sense if chance of hitting and blocking was calculated based on skills, tiredness and damage. This is rather surprising. The difference comes from tired people blocking less damage even if they managed to block.

Are these numbers still correct, more importantly, the chance to hit?

I only ask cause I had a character that is an expert at fighting (not sure if that matters one bit) miss quite a few times in a row. If numbers are still the same then damn, talk about some shitty luck there!

[SekoETC]

The numbers are clearly defined so I doubt they could be wrong. The chance of hitting or getting past a shield has nothing to do with skills. I think it should but the game just isn't built that way.

If you think about it, the chance of one hit succeeding is 0.8, but the chance for n hits succeeding is 0.8^n. So

2 - 64%
3 - 51%
4 - 41%
5 - 33%
6 - 26%
7 - 21%
8 - 17%
9 - 13%
10 - 11%
and so on.

It looks like that if you hit more than 3 people, it's statistically likely that you'll miss at least once.

[Cogliostro]

If it isn't then shouldn't it be connected to skill at least somewhat?

Both the chance to miss and the chance to fail at blocking.

[SekoETC]

Bear in mind that the system was originally written before skills were implemented. So someone just tossed in all the modifiers but the hit, block and missing chances remain constants. How much would it break the system if hitting and dodging were also affected by skills? It would make sense if an expert fighter could hit an awkward fighter maybe 90% of the time but an awkward fighter could hit an expert only maybe 10-20% of time. Getting a hit past the shield is an equivalent to critical hits and even a poor fighter could get lucky with those, but in other games critical hit chance is usually just 1-2% instead of 30% (although maybe that 30% comes after figuring out if it's inside the 80% that hits in the first place). Criticals could also do more damage, although not enough to kill a person. Maybe it could favor low damage weapons, because with powerful weapons you're likely to deal a lot of damage in any case so it would be difficult to increase that.

[Cogliostro]

It'd be brilliant if these things depended on the relationship in skill between the attacker and defender, as you say. Making some weaker weapons more likely to cause shield-bypass (where it makes sense for the weapon) is also a very cool idea.

[Piscator]

If hitting and blocking were affected by skill, damage shouldn't be at the same time. I think it should be possible to switch to a system where hit chance is determined by skill and damage by strength (each value factoring in differently based on weapon type), but I wonder if that would be too mainstream (for some peoples taste).

[SekoETC]

It would make sense to me, as long as the skill weightings were taken into account. Although in real life strength would define how far ranged weapons would reach, so it wouldn't be solely based on skill, but since locations in Cantr are 1-dimensional, I guess that can be disregarded.

[Piscator]

I'd say skill weighting would have to be transformed. Instead of how it is handled now, a minimal and maximal value for hitting chance and damage could be assigned to weapons. The weapon would do minimal damage if the char has the lowest possible strength value and maximal damage if strength is maxed out. Same for skill and hit chance. A battle axe could then for example have a damage range of 20-60 and a to hit range of 75-85, while a crossbow could have a damage range of 35-45 and a to hit range of 60-100. This way a skilled person would profit more from a crossbow, while a strong person would get an advantage from using a battle axe, just like it is intended with the current skill weighting system. It would also be more transparent than the current system since you could easily assess how much damage you would do/ how good your hit chances are (average strength = average damage, maximum skill = maximum hit chance).

Similarly a shield by-pass chance could be assigned to a weapon (based on skill).

[Doug R.]

Split topic and moved to general discussion.

[Idriveayugo]

How are we supposed to know our strength, skill, and fighting #'s?

[Piscator]

What do you mean? Since when is it a problem to find out how strong or skilled you are?

[returner]

What do you mean? Since when is it a problem to find out how strong or skilled you are?

I think he's referring to this new system's ideology, in which case..

..this is a role-playing game, we need to know what our characters look like. If we don't know, then we make it up. And if we make it up, but our character is the opposite of that, it's poor role-play.

If I am a weak character (bear in mind, I don't know this), but I say I am strong, and I am a warrior, then it would be considered extremely poor role-play.