Damage Types: Pierce, Slash, and Crush

WraithLord · #1 October 8th, 2003, 11:59 AM

I've played the warlords series, age of xxx and other TBS/RTS that implemented this system.
Some implemented it very badly some better.
For example, the age of XXX system is horrible. both shallow and extreme. really turned me off and is the main reason I stoped playing them.
OTOH the warlords implementation is more subtle and added depth, diversty and increased the fun factor in the game.

buttom line I agree with saber, this system can add a lot to the game if it's introduced subtly.
If the devs don't have the resources/inclination to do so carefully then I prefer they leave it be.

Aristoteles · #2 October 8th, 2003, 12:17 PM

Warlords or Ages series are pure strategy games. Dominions has lot more RPg elements than those games.
I agree, this system should be added, if the AI can learn, that how to 'use' it in a proper way.

WraithLord · #3 October 8th, 2003, 02:10 PM

Aristoteles said

Quote:

Warlords or Ages series are pure strategy games. Dominions has lot more RPg elements than those games.
I agree, this system should be added, if the AI can learn, that how to 'use' it in a proper way.

I tend to disagree. I consider DOM to be a very good strategy game with some RPG elements.
Now, warlords battlecry and, soon to be released, warlords IV are also strategy games with even stronger emphesis on RPG.

Mortifer · #4 October 8th, 2003, 02:27 PM

Hmmm...I think you cannot compare Doms to those games, since those are very different.

[Just a side note: Warlords 4. will be the worst in the Warlords series IMHO. - Its got some horrible design..]

This system would be very good to have, as I said before, but ONLY if it can be implented correctly. The biggest question is the AI. It will use it properly or not. [IE. Make the right decisions with this system - like do not attack an army with swordsmen [[slashing damage]] if that enemy army has got high slashing protection etc.]

[ October 08, 2003, 14:54: Message edited by: Mortifer ]

WraithLord · #5 October 8th, 2003, 03:48 PM

Initially they planned to make a MOM like tac battle for warlords-IV. I was really excited.
Then they opted for that strange battle resolution

licker · #6 October 8th, 2003, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DominionsFAN:
WOW! This system sounds damn cool! I would be very happy to see it in game!

I have a question. The AI will handle the troops properly if we will have a system like this? I mean you will have to build different troop types than, because of the various weapon damages. So if I build troops with good slashing protection, the AI will know that he must build troops with piercing attacks?
If the AI could handle this situation, than I say do not even hesitate to add this system!

This is more than a 'can the AI handle it' issue though. The bigger question should be (and is to me at least) what difference will this system make? Now alot of the difference that it makes will depend on how it is implemented, so before I continue much further I need more specifics from Saber on how he envisions this working.

Questions:

1) How will the different armors and weapons be spread among the nations? Potential problmes I see here are either giving all nations access to the same sets of numbers (boring if you ask me) or risking imbalances in certain nations that cannot handle certain attacks or defenses very well. Furthermore, if you want to provide for more coverage of attacks or defense you will increase the number of units that each nation has by roughly 9 units!!! That seems just insane to me, but it wouldn't kill anything, just make the game more annoying by having to keep track of those ~9 new units.

2) What kind of scale are we talking about for the effectiveness of the three new damage types? Potential problem, if its too big the game really becomes rock/paper/scisiors, if its too small, then its game play value is diminished (other than for the imersion quality, which is not really high on the list of why to add this system I think).

3) If the nations are to rely more on independant troops to fill their holes (assuming they don't get coverage for each area) how is the starting position imbalance addressed? Outside of scripted maps I don't see how this would work. It might be fine for SP, but I can see the MP people taking issue with this potential problem.

4) Not so much a question as a clarification...
There are three new damage types (and the corolary resistances to them) call them S, P, and B. How fine of a matrix would be involved in determining the varing levels of S, P, B and rS, rP, and rB? Would we have 9 different units comprising all the combinations? 18 units? 3 units? What? Moving to a completely different direction in unit creation would fix this somewhat, that is buying the base unit with money, then buying the base equipment for that unit with resources and equiping your base units in a similar fasion as your commanders, however, I expect a solution like that would be fairly unweildy for the Devs to want to implement. That suggestion would definately add to micro too.

Ok that's enough questions for now, like I said, I'm not against this idea per se, I just want to explore it further so that when/if it (or something like it) is implemented its been thouroghly thrashed out

ywl · #7 October 8th, 2003, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by licker (Licker's arguments deleted):

Originally posted by DominionsFAN:
WOW! This system sounds damn cool! I would be very happy to see it in game!

Some more questions while licker is still at it.

How about the various magical spells and attacks? The armor negating ones (e.g. lightning) are fine. But how about the ones which are affected by protection or only armor piercing (1/2 protection, I guess): various forms of fire, "Geyser", "Cold bolt", "Blade Wind", "Gifts from Heaven", "Acid Rain", "Magma Eruption"?

How about monsters? Life drain of undead (armor piercing only), breaths weapons, crushing of Water Elementals (also armor piercing only)? Also, how much piercing and slashing should we assign to the monster and animal bites and claws? Piercing for longer claws and slashing for shorter?

The problem is classification of damage to piercing, slashing and bashing are only good (to a limited extent) for melee weapons. It fails (badly IMHO) if we want to use it on wider circumstances. Using a single protection number may be rough, but it's at least simple and approximate most situations equally well (or bad).