View Single Post
  #491  
Old June 24th, 2005, 06:53 AM
Nerfix's Avatar

Nerfix Nerfix is offline
Lieutenant General
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Hyvinkää, Finland
Posts: 2,703
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Nerfix is on a distinguished road
Default Re: The Dominions 3: \"Wishlist\"

Quote:
Saber Cherry said:
Hi everyone! Been a while.

As for Dom III, I'd love to see a few things:

First, a new combat engine would be nice, though kind of a major change. But for example... putting all stats in the form of low integer numbers has numerous drawbacks. To make a helmet with better protection than 1, you have to have protection 2... which is twice as good! Thus, there are only 3 standard helmet types: none, normal, and super-heavy. Many weapons come out very similar as well, because there are not many variations of small integer combinations (attack, defense, and damage).

An entirely new combat system that used floating point calculations could retain most of the existing numbers, and simply allow greater variation for new items or old ones that need tweaking (like giving a dagger 1.7 damage, a coral knife 1.2 damage, and a copper cap 0.6 protection and .1 encumbrance). Alternately, extant numbers could be reprocessed and multiplied by a fixed value of 2 or 10 (giving normal humans 20 or 100 HP rather than 10, and increasing strengths and weapon damages by a similar ratio) and altering the dice.

Would this be worth the trouble? Yes, in my opinion. Due to the use of small integers, many units and items in the game are (statistically) nearly identical, and some are exactly identical. Others, like the series of armor types, may not be numerical duplicates, but leave no room for new additions without cloning current stats and simply renaming them. Furthermore, changing or modifying the combat engine would allow the perfect opportunity for a more advanced system, with (for example) locational protection and damage (for example, wearing a helmet would not protect you from taking an arrow in the leg, which would slow down a unit for the remainder of combat in addition to causing damage), damage type modifiers (like chain mail providing a bonus versus slashing damage, and an axe doing slash/blunt type damage, and skeletons being pierce resistant), and so forth.

-Cherry
I double those suggestions.

I would like to also see some more variety in weapons, like anti-airshield missiles (a 10 Anti-Airshield missile weapon would reduce the airshield effect by 10), weapons that have serious bonuses against riders (Guisarmes, Pikes) or some specific type of creatures. If damage types don't get in then it would be nice to see more armor piercing weapons like the Longbows, Rondels or Mauls.

It would be nice if weapons could have the damage types and perhaps even going so far that you could define if the weapon always does mixed damage or if it does damage type x for x% of the time and the other type for x% of time (An Axe could be 70% Slash and 30% Crush and a Spetum could do Pierce 75% of time and Slash 25% of the time), perhaps even separate damage values for the diffrent attack types like 6 piercing and 2 slashing for the Spetum...

And how about diffrent versions of weapons going by the Eras? In the early era Halberds wouldn't differ all that much from big axes but in later eras they would have the spear-head (piercing damage) and the hook (bonus against riders).

There could also be weapons that would disappear or appear by the eras: Spetums, Partisans, Copper and Stone weapons in the early era while the later era could have things like Ahlspiess or Brandistocks.

Repeling could be improved too and it could use the various modifiers of the weapon like Poisoned or Magical in the attack. Some weapons like Pikes could have a repel bonus. Also, didn't pikeneers often historically carry short swords with them because the pike was next to useless in close combat? Perhaps making pikes and some similar weapons an infantry version of lances?
__________________

"Boobs are OK. Just not for Nerfix [img]/threads/images/Graemlins/Smile.gif[/img] ."
- Kristoffer O.
Reply With Quote