Event-based combat II

[Dinonykos]

http://one.xthost.info/Dinonykos/Com...sed3Rounds.pdf

This is a link to my suggestion for a 3-rounds-event-based combat. I have not yet tested it completely, anyway, it might be inspirative for everybody who wants to do something similar...
My first approach to an event-based combat is much more complicated (however, works very good), but has the adventage that it can also be used for step events, while the approach posted above only works on a specific square.

[Uatu]

Hmm - interesting...

The "do-or-die attack" looks fun What is that?

I guess you are using a sort of reverse-THAC0 here (lower wins, not higher)?

[Dinonykos]

Originally Posted by Uatu Hmm - interesting... The "do-or-die attack" looks fun What is that?

It will be explained in the demo, however, I would anyway like to discuss my combat system, so I'll explain in detail:

In general, the THAC0 of the first 4 party members is summarized (thus, a level 1 party e.g. has values of ~70).

For a normal attack, the script used in the logic-block event (LBE) firstly adds a random value between 1 and 10 to the combined party THAC0, than substracts 5 (thus the party THAC0 fluctuates between 66 and 75). A weak group of monsters may have a THAC0 of 70. The party value is then compared to the monsters value. If the party THAC0 is lower than 70, the party wins the first round (indicated by a quest) and gets a "reasonable" random damage (appropriate to the monsters' combat strength and altered by the party characters' AC). If the value is higher, the party loses the first round and gets double damage!

In the do-or-die attack, a random value of 1-20 (generally, this is also depending on the monsters) is substracted from the combined party THAC0. This means a higher chance to defeat even much stronger monsters. However, if the party loses the round, there is a good chance that the party dies (thus do-or-die attack). And even if the party wins, they get double damage!

In the defensive mode, a random value of 1-10 is added to the combined party THACO. This means, that the chance to win a round is smaller. However, even if the round is lost, the party will only receive normal damage, and if the round is won, the party has a good chance to get no damage at all.

In the model I posted, each round is connected to a quest stage (ShogunfFight in this case). The third round is only necessary if the party has lost one round and won the other. The quest ShogunWin is used to make sure that the party has won one round. When the party wins the whole combat (2 rounds won), both quests will be completed.

The disadvantages of my approach are firstly that there is nothing like HP for the opposing party (monster). It's just like in most fighting games: Win 2 rounds and you win the fight... Secondly, the specific damage of a weapon is not important, only its THAC0-Bonus. Thirdly: No magic envolved yet... Fourthly: In this simple model, you cannot decide for the different members of the party. Fifthly: No long ranged weapons yet... (but I have a fair compensation for that in some quests... )

The advantages I see are:
1. Since there are still bugs in the normal DC combat system, it is reasonable to avoid it.
2. Some people (like me) are more into adventuring than into fighting.
3. It is possible to assign special events to the ongoing battle - e.g. sparing an opponents life, capture an opponent, be captured, surprise attacks... Thus, I even think that one could combine this approach with the normal DC combat system...

There will also be some special "challenges" in my design: Only one party member against one opponent...

[Uatu]

Interesting system there! I do agree with some of the reasons you gave for me (especially #1). As for #2 - well, I often just put everyone on Quick mode when I am testing games. It is true that battles do take a long time in general. #3 is a good reason as well (no way to implement this in the normal combat mode?).

I do like magic and ranged weapons, though - I always thought it was stupid how the Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, and Wizardry-type games treated missile weapons (and magic, too)...

[Dinonykos]

Originally Posted by Uatu I do like magic and ranged weapons, though - I always thought it was stupid how the Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, and Wizardry-type games treated missile weapons (and magic, too)...

Indeed. It is strange that you cannot use bows and spells to fight enemies that are not on the same square in these games (at least in Wizardry, I do not know how it is in the other games).
I liked how the earlier Might and Magic games solved this problem. They were not real-time, and you could nevertheless see the enemies approach in the 3D view (and attack them with arrows and combat spells).
You could do that (with some drawbacks) in DC, but I am afraid of the effort...

[Uatu]

Yeah, it sort of worked in Might and Magic - but the enemies always killed me anyway At most you only got like one or two shots (which did little), and then they were right at you and ready to pound you away

[Dinonykos]

Yep, but I liked the system nevertheless.

The "quest-event based combat system" does not yet work perfectly. Sometimes, for reasons I do not know, some events are triggered although they shouldn't.
For example: If there is a quest event stage 2 that sets the quest "completed", and you run in another quest event (with the same quest name) stage 3, will it be triggered, or not? I thought it would not be...

[Uatu]

Ah - working out the kinks seems to be a tough one (seems that we get kinks no matter what system we use )

[Dinonykos]

Well, I am quite optimistic. So far, I have managed to make DC do whatever I wanted...

Okay, after excluding things that I knew would definitely not be possible...

[Uatu]

That is very comforting! (At least someone can do it, I mean... ) I give up too quickly perhaps...