Flowing Fighting System

Thinking about it, this adds a few parameters to attacking:

1. Location of the weapon ( top, middle, bottom and left, middle, right could work )
   
2. Start Location of the Attack
   
3. End Location of Successful Attack
   
4. End Location of Failed Attack
   
5. End Location of Blocked Attack
   
6. Time Taken to move weapon from one location to another.
   
7. Time Taken to Complete Attack
   

With those parameters, you''d have a start at a system that works like what you described.


People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~

Have you ever tried "Die by the Sword"?

In this action fantasy game (underrated in my opinion) you control the legs with one set of keys and and the sword with another. This meant that to control your character in this game you had to use in the range of 16-20 keys. It was ok after some practice.

The point was that you move the sword in front of you by using one set of keys (the numpad) and had a lean key (0). So to make a swing you pressed 6 a bit and then held down 4. When a hit was made the sword speed and strength was used to calculate damage and body parts came flying of it was hard enough, otherwise small wounds appeared. Strength could be gained by charging the opponent at the same time.

Combining this with a skeletal animation system that took into acount variations in height in the floor and a risch varity of monsters this was really excellant sword fighting.

Die by the Sword also had a "move editor" where moves could be predefined moves which could be triggered in mid fight with a set of hot keys.

I remember one brilliant scene where the main character is caught in a rope trap and have to fight while swinging back anf forth upside down.

Try it out, if you haven''t. It''s it is on budget sale.

Jacob Marner

About Die By The Sword (which is excellent research material on this subject)...

You can download a fairly good demo from the official website for free (about 15 Mb I think).

I tried Die... for a while, with the mouse as the controller.

The movement of the mouse is DIRECTLY linked to the movement of the character''s sword.

This gives you a real sensation of control...
Or lack thereof. Because the fact is that to me it seems just too hard to control the mouse good enough to give me an adequate control in game. To me, my sword kept getting stuck in the sand...But I''m sure a little practice will prevent that. Still, I can''t see this interface ever working to give me enough skill to really fight a tough one-on-one battle against another player controlled character. I still think it''ll just result in a move-mouse-from-left-to-right-to-left-to-right fest.

I think the interface used in Die has some merits but needs improvement. For example, there is no real way to STAB. Also, there will never be a way to control two weapons at once (which I think is a big thing).

I think a good fighting game should be made with PLAYER SKILL in mind. I mean, the player should be the one with the actual skill in fighting (''Die'' being hard for me right now, might actually end up doing just that, but I just have to playtest it more to know). The player should be the one that knows what he''s doing when he pushes the buttons. Not like the way I play most arcade games...push buttons and see what happens.

After Player Skill, Character skill is next. The system used should be able to reflect growth of the character in fighting skills. Strenght, speed, agility, dexterity shouldn''t just be numbers, or be used to determine who hits and who misses (you have AC 5, I have Strenght 6, Dexterity 8, I roll die and that decides if I hit or not), they should be an addition to player skill.
If a player is bad at fighting with a sword, no ability scores/skills should make him an excellent fighter. High character statistics might make the ''player'' a better fighter but it shouldn''t elevate him too much. A good player with bad character statistics should win against a bad player with excellent character statistics.

And yes, one way to show growth of the character is to let him learn new moves that will improve his fighting skills.

To Felonius and Silvermyst:
Die By The Sword has been suggested in the thread that sparked this discussion. The reason Dwarfsoft started this thread is because he and I were discussing ways of having a pretty interesting sword-fighting system that uses no more than two fingers on each hand to use. I.e., no control systems with 20 buttons, simple point-and-click, with possibly one or two modifier keys, MAX.


To the Anonymous Poster:
That''s an interesting observation. I know very little about actual swordfighting, I''m in this discussion because I''m pretty good with simplifying user interfaces to the bone. Even with the motion you describe, you might fail in stopping the weapon where you intended, and this might require you to adjust your strategy for the next blow.
Making this realistic is an interesting challenge, and for this we''d need people that know a bit about effective melee or swordfighting.


People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~

What kind of battles are you looking for ?
Realtime battles for FPS, realtime in 3rd personn view or turn based ?

Since I do think it''s for realtime, how much ''arcade'' should the game be ?
I mean is the battle an important part of the gameplay or just a requirement in certain circumstances ?

The answers of those questions are really important to the design of the final battle system.

For a FF like it would be different than from a Zelda like.

I still hesistate on the value of battles and arcade vs strategy in my game.
Do the player control a party or only his character ?

Would like to have some more details please.

-* So many things to do, so little time to spend. *-

Quickly, before I have to go to my exam , I have to defend my choice. I said top-left to bottom-right for a reason. That is a simple hack''n''slash methodology. Just look at diablo and DII if you don''t believe me... That is why I suggested it. Personally, I would make that attack the stupidest and least likely to do anything...

More later (once I have properly read all the replies )

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers'' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

First off, MKV had it right. You can have a simple 2-Button mouse with single and double click possibilities, possibly even a third button... And maybe a shift key or a ctrl key ON OCCASION. That makes it very simple to control.

About the left-right right-left... fest. It wouldn''t happen due to an innertia value. It is too slow (and too energy consuming) to stop an attack and turn it around. It is much faster to start moving in a different plane (up/down, backwards/forwards) than to stop a blade dead and reverse the direction. This is why you penalise that kind of attack..

Also, doing so in such a wild manner leaves you open to attack. The system that I was originally discussing with MKV worked so that when the opponent was attacking, you could see a small region on their body (because you are clicking on their localised area, and not just moving the mouse around blindly) which is more vulnerable and harder (because of size and oppertunity) to hit.

quote:

---

Original post by Ingenu

What kind of battles are you looking for ?
Realtime battles for FPS, realtime in 3rd personn view or turn based ?

---

3rd person is the way that I am thinking of it, though it is not Iso, and you are generally always facing your characters back, as your character faces forward towards the enemy.

quote:

---

Since I do think it''s for realtime, how much ''arcade'' should the game be ?
I mean is the battle an important part of the gameplay or just a requirement in certain circumstances ?

---

Believe it or not, but this system is designed for realtime. The only reason that it is NOT arcade is because you have easier controls without the pointless key combinations (hard to remember). It is a bit arcade in the sense that you have attack combinations and are required to fight in real time. This system is supposed to be difined so that the player must become involved in the effort of fighting, and it also reduces the number of enemies that the character can face at once. The better the actual player is, the more enemies they can easily face (though, there is obviously a limit). I think that this system makes the player value their battle more, and makes them think about thier involvement in the game.

quote:

---

The answers of those questions are really important to the design of the final battle system.

For a FF like it would be different than from a Zelda like.

I still hesistate on the value of battles and arcade vs strategy in my game.
Do the player control a party or only his character ?

Would like to have some more details please.

-* So many things to do, so little time to spend. *-

---

In my game, the player ONLY controls their character. Though, they can ''ask'' their NPC companions to do something. This way, the player is one character in the game, and also can have a party. It is a trade off that I like

I hope that explains things a little better

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers'' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

I was thinking of simple ways of slowing it down for single player... Have you ever been in a fight and everything seems to happen so slowly around you... Matrix style? I have, 3 times... You can get away with slowing down the world once battle commences and the player is then on their own to attack as quickly as possible. They can become more attune with their senses which allows even slower attack and defence.

For multiplayer it is reasonably easy - there are no NPC battles so there is no problem of the computer attacking too fast, and each player v player attack will be fast and furious leaving the BETTER OPPONENT standing... It doesn''t matter if you have the bulkiest armour and the other guy isn''t wearing any, if he is faster at attacking and defending, he will be able to slowly bleed you dry

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers'' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

I read a lot of posts but never post myself. This subject interested me a lot. I have been learning Japanese sword fighting(Iaido) for quiet some time now (obviously as a hobby.) While I can understand the fact that a game might need you to go through the opponents body slicing him or her in half, the philosophy of Iaido is to do the maximum damage with exertion. It would be pretty intersting to see that being implemented. I mean, let the player have something like:
float fRateOfExertionPerMove;
float fMaxExertionCapacity;
float fCurrentExertionCapacity;
and the more moves the player does, the more tired the player and less accurate the player''s controls become. Also, you could use the the mouse to pivot the upper-body left, right, front(lunge) and back. And use keys to make the player jump, kneel, etc. These are just suggestions, and you may ignore them. I really hope you guys make a game of good sword fighting. ;-)

If Iaido doesn''t interest you, then how about fencing which wold require the player to have quick reflex and hand-eye coordination?!?
-AnkurX

I have done fencing, interesting sport. Not really attuned much to broadswords though... More of a rapier sport .

Anyway... I don''t know about making it realistic (and especially about using floats . longs are just as good and faster) but I certainly would like to see players battling it out by using EXERTION instead of just quick clicking speed. It would be mentally exerting to use such a system, which is why I think it involves the player more.

As for moving the upper body... I just had an idea MKV; *shock*
Using the block method, you could just chose to do a single block (whichever click it was) by selecting either which direction the attack was coming from, or by just allowing a generic block to attempt to block everything. Additionally, you could click and drag (using the block button) which would allow you to dodge (by ducking and rolling etc) which would eliminate the use of the modifier key (a little)

The modifier key can then be used simply to allow dirty tricks (such as kicking and headbutting etc).

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers'' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

Sorry i only got through half of this thread and had a thought i''d like to share. The idea is using quick clicks.

Basically using 2 button you get 4 different combo''s from quick clicking the mouse buttons. 4 different combo''s equals 4 different moves. What moves you do could be pre-set somehow in the gui or what not. If you include the middle mouse button then you get 8 combo''s which really should be that hard to pick up yes?

"So you''re the one that designed that game are you?"
*Gulp* "Umm, yeah"

I think i spoke too soon.

"So you''re the one that designed that game are you?"
*Gulp* "Umm, yeah"

Okay, two things to reply to:
1. Exertion.
2. Dragging the mouse.



1. Exertion is a nice idea. Perhaps just slowing the player''s action down as he performs more than his threshold of action in some unit of game time. This would make combat very interesting indeed, because you need to make the tradeoff between the kinds of attacks available:
Fast, moderate damage, tiring.
moderate speed, moderate damage, exertion stays same.
moderate speed, low damage, exertion goes down.
etc...
This way of designing attacks would, I think, lead to a good game.


2. Dragging the mouse is one interaction we''d skipped so far! Good thinking on that, dwarfie.
How many interactions does that give us?
2 mousebuttons, single and double click, single position and dragging. That''s eight, not bad. For instance:

1. left button, single click, no drag: fast stab on body part
   
2. left button, single click, drag: fast slash across body parts
   
3. left button, double click, no drag: powerful stab on body part
   
4. left button, double click, drag: powerful slash across body parts
   
5. right button, single click, no drag: block against body part
   
6. right button, single click, drag: dodge in drag direction ( combat moving )
   
7. right button, double click, no drag: generic block
   
8. right button, double click, drag: roll in drag direction
   

In case anyone''s wondering: double click and drag is click, click-hold and drag, release...


How would that be?


People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~

Damn paul! Using both buttons at the same time is something I hadn''t thought of yet

That adds three more we could assign:
left click then right click ( pin weapon? )
right click then left click ( disarm? )
right and left at the same time ( possibly for general block, with a reassignment of double-right to something else, like shield punch or something... )

People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~

Consecutive post #3:
I just realised that for the most part I''ve assigned the left button to the "main" arm ( attacking arm ), and the right to the "secondary" arm ( shield arm ), except for the dodging moves...
perhaps this is something to work with.


People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~

Expanding on your previous revelation MadKeithV, how about the left-mouse button for the left hand, the right-mouse for the right hand, andboth buttons together for dodging. This probable wouldn''t work too well, but I''m just brainstorming. For instance, if you have a sheild in the right hand and a sword in the left, then maybe a single right click would put the sheild out whilea double right click would make the player try to advance (pushing the opponent back with the sheild) and left clicks for the sword. For dodging then, both buttons pressed together and then dragging. Different speeds of drags can dodge with more force. Then again, if the player carries two weapons, for instance two lightweight swords, then trying to use the left and right at the same time would result in a dodge. Maybe we''d have to bring in ctrl or something.
Alright, so we have our basic swordfighting laid out, and its awesome. I''m just going to throw this out there, would there be a way to bring in shoves, kicks leaps or other miscelaneous fight maneuvers that could be used in combination with the basic sparring controls, and how would the player use these?

Great ideas guys. I like all the combos... And think about if you include the 3rd mouse button for those with that advantage

Anyway... About kicks and shoves etc, maybe you could hold down both buttons in a lclick-rclick on your body part.. That selects the body part to do the dirty trick...

Either that, or you can just have the ctrl, shift, or alt key to give the modifier

NO! I have it! Single click on your body part dragging it at the proposed area of attack and release on that area. ie... Kick in the groin (which is as dirty a trick as I can think of) would be a lclick on your right leg, drag to groin, release on groin.

Thoughts?

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers'' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

quote:

---

Original post by Anonymous Poster

This motion prevents the sword from travelling much further than to your intended point of impact. Even if the opponent has moved out of the way the sword stops there (without using muscular force).

---

Just a (not so short) note, since this discussion is about swordfighting. The same method is also used in unarmed martial arts. You twist your hand just before it hits, which not only stops the arm, but also give the punch or strike more power. Besides, it looks more sharp and "professional", when your hand "magically" stops in midair. Also, your arms or legs should never be totally straight at the end of a strike, since this could easily strain a muscle.

About slowing down the fight: maybe you could somehow calculate the adrenaline level of the PC (player character), and make the battle more slower and strikes more powerful with higher adrenaline level. And after an intensive fight, you should be really tired.

I intended to write a(n even) longer post, but I have to catch a train. Maybe I''ll write more tonight (it''s 13:55 in Finland now).

-Jussi

For a two-button mouse, I see the following options:

One click right button
One click left button
Double click right button
Double click left button
Click and hold right button
Click and hold left button
Click and hold right and left button
(I think one-clicking both buttons at the same time might be a little too hard to time, but if not, add ''one click right and left button'' and maybe even ''double click right and left button)

Personally, if I were developing a game like this at this very moment, I''d start by asking myself how much more I can accomplish by using a 3 or 4 button mouse. With all the requirements placed on people (videocard, memory etc), I think it wouldn''t be out of the question to make a 3 or 4 button mouse a requirement. It might even free up some other requirement area''s (maybe needing less memory, because the system using a 3 or 4 button mouse might be a little easier to program altogether)