Eater1 on 12/7/2003 at 09:13
I'm a bit new at these forums, but having just played Arx I can say I am most definitely hooked and am quite interesting in this Arx 2 I've heard about.
Anyway, I thought I would contribute my view on this subject, as the click-and-hold interface in Arx kinda of puzzled me a bit too.
Sterrett: as a fencer and someone who has used a real sword, you should know that, while a heavy sword may take time to swing, holding your sword over your head in preparation for a blow is simply inviting an "attack on preparation". True, a heavy sword takes time to swing, but warriors in early medieval times used a shield to protect themselves during a swing (though there's none of that with a 2-handed sword). That, and the "swing" times in Arx feel and look way too long - after the first second or so, the "gem" keeps getting brighter but your character is simply holding the sword in place. What I would really like to see in the next Arx game is more focus on defensive maneuvers - rather than just pulling distance, it would be great to be able to use the shield (as someone suggested) or cancel an attack in order to parry. This could also make the game more realistic by allowing the HP of humanoid (sword-wielding) characters to be lowered to realistic levels, since they would now be able to avoid attacks altogether with defensive moves. Other than that, the actual attacks can be chosen randomly for all I care (though the ability to hit multiple opponents does make some swings better than others). I already feel like a movie character when a single swing lops off the heads of three goblins, but adding in the ability to use a shield or parry an attack would enhance that feel greatly, and add realism, not to mention forcing the player to actually pay attention to what the enemy is doing rather than click - step back - step forward - release. The really important thing, though, regardless of what is done, is to add more stuff for the player to do in melee combat so that it doesn't feel so boring - even a duck feature (that actually avoids blows) would help in this.
James Sterrett on 12/7/2003 at 14:01
All true (and I do agree the two-handed sword held high feels pretty silly :) , though arguably there are useful parries from that position, using the weapon's weight to help get it into position). On the other hand, if you raise it out of range, the opponent is going to need to get in and out fast, before your readied blow can come down, which might be an intimidating prospect - akin to an established line; you have to deal with the threat while lunging in for the hit. Not an all-powerful position by any means, but it can have its uses.
I'm not so sure the swing times are too long, at least for the big weapons; the one time I was able to play with a 6-foot greatsword, I was stunned by just how incredibly heavy and awkward the things are. It took a lot (no timer! sorry! :( ) of effort and time to get the thing moving. Having said which, tieing the swing-prep time to the user's strength, agility, and weapon-skill stats would make a lot of sense. Had I more time with the weapon, I'm sure I'd have begun to learn how to use it more adroitly.
Have you tried sword-fighting in Thief, using the Block function? It's tricky to make sure it'll actually stop a blow, but when you are lined up correctly, it does work.
In any event, the key problem is interface... how you fit the extra functionality into the control scheme smoothly makes all the difference in whether or not it works. It's easy to see that, say, right-click will activate "block/parry", but what have you thereby excluded that might be used more?
Eater1 on 12/7/2003 at 21:20
The thief fencing interface was great! Too bad the game encouraged avoiding it at all costs, or I would have become quite proficient at fencing guards and undead... However, due to a combination of the difficulty of making parries and the fairly high number of blows you could absorb, it sometimes made more sense to just swing away at your enemy and maybe use distance to avoid blows. Something like thief but with easier parries (but more deadly attacks) could absolutely work in my opinion (with the option, of course, of using the shield too).
Eater.
Chade on 13/7/2003 at 04:39
You know, ala blocking, just making it a context sensitive "attack" might work fine. After all, when blocking, the trick is to look at the incoming weapon, not to press a separate mouse button.
As for a shield, just hacing it around 45 degrees on the elft hand side of your body might do fine as well. Well, this is only a guess, of course, but if you just blocked blows from that side automatically, it might work fine. Especially in a fight with more then one creature. The downside would be that looking away from a creature attacking you to block, even if you could still see him on the side of the screen and you made a convincing aggresive block animation, it still might feel a bit wierd in a combat situation.
Also, in a fight with more then one creature, being able to "push" opponents (by moving) you were in contact with might be interesting.
It's sorta hard to say when you can't just try it!
Also, I think that this time they will not have any "modes" ... except maybe a casting mode. So depending on how they do use, whether it's double click or right click, they may have a free button just from that. Or maybe they will choose not to let you use stuff with a weapon drawn again ... not sure if that's a good idea or not.
Eater1 on 13/7/2003 at 04:55
I really like your shield idea, though I still want a sepperate "block" button (they can always make it an option to have manual blocking, can't they?). As for the modes... I think it's a bit better with modes than with something like Morrowind where you could just walk around town with a sword and shield drawn, pick up items, make potions, open doors, etc., all with your phantom "third hand". Perhaps the best way would be so that you could tell if something can be manipulated (the cursor would change) but not actually manipulate it while in "combat mode". That way you could still explore that dark, scary dungeon with the sword drawn, but would have to put it away to actually do stuff.
Eater.
James Sterrett on 13/7/2003 at 16:19
Eater - you mean you don't have a third hand? ;)
A possible method....
If we combined the block/parry functions, then LMB = attack, RMB = parry/block; holding the RMB down provides defence against anything in your cone of vision, but prevents you from attacking. The effectiveness of your parries and blocks depends on your relevant skill (Defence). RMB overrides LMB, so you can cancel an attack directly into a parry, but attacking requires the hold-and-wait to set it up.
One side effect of this arrangement would be the increased value of lighter (faster-prepping) weapons, because their shorter prep time would mean it would be quicker to shift from defence to offence.
On the other hand, it leaves out offensive use of the shield; not sure how to try to factor that in; possibly it's simply too complex for the interface, and from what I know it requires a differently-built shield in any event [my experience there being from ~10 minutes with Roman gear; the concept there, I'm was told (and was so surprised I double-checked it elsewhere later! :) ), is that the shield is punched into the enemy to unbalance him, then you stab the sword into the groin for the kill. The shield has *one* hold point, at the boss, and it's slightly above the center of gravity. You hold it palm-down, and strength is at a premium! Very different from a forearm-mounted shield, which is easier to carry and block with but essentially precludes a punch.]
It also leaves out the shield being used defensively all the time, which isn't very correct. :) Which brings us back to Chade's notion of an area blocked on the shield-side, dependent on the Defence skill, and using RMB for a parry. I'd tend towards having the blocked area be based on the size of the shield, beginning from straight forward and extending off towards the shielded side. A large shield could reasonably block a 90 degree arc (dead ahead to left shoulder), while a small buckler might only help with a parry.
This method would also work if the shield blocks your view in the relevant chunk of the screen, creating the need to wiggle a bit to hit the enemy, ducking in and out of the cover of your shield - plus the need to wiggle a bit to figure out where the guy is! Though in the game, we lack the peripheral vision to stray limbs, and also the flexibility to launch attacks over or under the shield, so perhaps the shield shouldn't block all the view. Another thing to consider is integration of flails/morning stars, whose chain allows attacks "past" the shield if the shield-weilder isn't alert.
Note that I'm a big fan of using the middle mouse button for "Use/activate/pick up/search/etc", and I find it awkward to use in combination with the other two, so I'm trying to leave it out. :)
Eater1 on 14/7/2003 at 00:27
Well, getting above two buttons probably is a bit much, but your system sounds nice and simple. The trick is to allow the system to be usable with minimal knowledge but also make it so that an experienced player can get more out of it, which I think that system might manage. Anything else (like the flail thing) can be handled with the same controls, it's just a matter of adding a special check to see if the swing of the flail goes over the shield (and considering how the current Arx Fatalis game already checks every point along a weapon's path, that shouldn't be very hard to put it). And if you really must have offensive use of the shield, how about this: if the shield is held up (with the block/parry key), the player can walk into an opponent and thus damage/unbalance him.
Eater.
James Sterrett on 14/7/2003 at 03:59
Offensive shield use and flails aren't a must - and I wouldn't cry if they were tossed out; more a case of my brainstorming around on implications of using things.
I'm interested that we've come to a form of consensus on what to do, and that it looks a lot like Thief. :)
Eater1 on 14/7/2003 at 04:12
Well, what can I say? Thief looks good.
Shadowcat on 15/7/2003 at 22:46
Great thread... I love this sort of discussion.
The only enhancement that springs to mind at this stage is the possibility of automatic context-sensitive blocking of incoming blows according to your defensive stats, provided that you aren't taking explicit offensive or defensive action at the time (except for the second option in the next paragraph). In other words, your character might advance to the point where they may be able to block better than the player would be able to.
Maybe this should be an optional feature that players could switch off if they wanted to do it all themselves. Another option to state whether or not you want the game to automatically abort your strikes in order to block an incoming blow could also be good (in the situation where their attack will land before yours, or if the game judges on your character's behalf that the incoming attack is likely to be exceptionally damaging or perhaps fatal).
I can envisage combat situations with multiple opponents where this could be a very nifty feature. Maybe if your character got very good indeed, they might suddenly pull up their shield to take an incoming arrow shot that you (the player) weren't aware of in time to take action yourself.
Offensive skills could increase the speed and effectiveness of your attacks, but I figure you should still need to manually initiate all the offensive strikes :)
If the automated blocking didn't work out, then the skill could at least effect the speed and effectiveness of your blocks, including the speed at which you were able to abort an attack in order to block.
