Damage Types: Pierce, Slash, and Crush

[Endoperez]

I don't think this would be good. I would still be playing Dom2, of course, but I would not like it that much. I thought, at first, that this would be good but now, all these ideas seem to be empty, with no heart in them(sorry Saber) and the cons outweight tthe pros.

Those that are saying yes seem, to me, be saying yes for a system they have sen before, they have liked before, and with which they want to play again. The problem is, Dominions is not, nor will Dominions 2 be, anything like we have seen before.
It is whole, and it is good, as it is. The system that is in game now, while not perfect, suits this game well, and I think the suggested system would not be good for the game.

Even if the new system was not implemented, we would have a game which has very complicated battle system, and weapons and armor that differ alot from each other, as well as many options to use magic to strengthen your warriors in ways too many to write down.
And if this system was implemented, we would have even more things that we would have to take into account when recruiting armies. Even if the scouts of Dom2 can tell you what kind of people inhabit given province, it would be a big mess, and a good guess could give you an upper hand in otherwise even battle. I do not like roulette, but I love Dominions.

What in the latter system makes it better than the first? The fact that it is more complicated? More is more, but more micromanagement is no good. Damage types would make a spear (3,0,0,3) different from an axe(7,-1,-1,1), but they differ alot even with the old system. Aren't they different enough now, when an axe is used if you want to give out more damage, and a spear versus low-morale units. Axe might not hit troops with good defense, so spear might have an upper hand, and axe will also suffer versus spears as they are longer and spearmen have better defence. There are other factors as well, but with these only, with a spear and an axe being the only difference between your units, you have to take opponents' armies' morale, protection, defense, weapons and armor into account. With even more complicated system... *shudder* That would be a nightmare.

This is why I do not like the new system. The old one is complicated enough, and good enough, and new one is not that much better. This is just my opinion, of course. This idea would be very good in some other games, but I don't think it suits Dominions so well.

P.S. I think I should start practising so that I wouldn't write these mammoths all the time.

[EDIT] About mithril and other special metals: What do you think Black steel is? If you want armies with armors and weapons of metals of special quality, stick to Ulm and magic items of earth.

[ October 14, 2003, 09:52: Message edited by: Endoperez ]

[Wendigo]

The current system is broad enough:
We have weapons that differ in damage, lenght, attack & defense modifiers, nº of attacks & standard penetration/armour piercing/armour negating atributes, plus various magic effects.

And we have armour & shields that differ in protection, defense modifiers, encumbrance plus assorted magic effects.

The posibilities offered by combining both of the above are huge, and according to my experience in MP those are already hard enough to understand & master for the playerbase, without adding further complication on top.

The system is both complex & ellegant as it stands in Dom I, IMO the developers efforts are better comitted elsewhere.

[ October 14, 2003, 10:42: Message edited by: Wendigo ]

[Taqwus]

I'd concur that Illwinter likely has better things to do than categorize heck-knows HOW many different attack forms there are in the game. And bear in mind that some attack forms might fall into multiple types depending on use... ugh.

More complexity does not necessarily equal better, but it guarantees a heck of a lot more work.

[atul]

Originally posted by DominionsFAN:
Hell no! If you hit a decent platemail with a hammer -or with a sword-, you will take almost no damage.

If I remember correctly, at least some warhammers had been designed two-sided: a blunt hammerhead with a spike on the other side (gyah my english isn't up to this), a little like this:
___
|....\_^___ (poor ASCII to the
|...._____> rescue!)
|___/.||

Anyway, the blunt side for soft targets and crushing the bones below armour. And the spike side to act as a can opener for heavy armour.

So, were the distinction Slashing/Crushing/Piercing damage applied, this particular weapon should act as crushing or piercing, dependent on which kind of armour is attacked (we assume that the soldier wielding a hammer can make an intelligent decision).

Quite makes aforementioned distinction obsolete.

And anyone who has seen the movie Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon must admit that a spear can very well be used as a slashing weapon.

While different damage types as seen in many RPGs fit nicely to those games, I must also say that I don't think that it would be worth all the trouble. Yes, Doms has many RPGish elements, but personally I think that the ability to make your enemies' capitals suffer the fate of Carthago (destroy fort, plunder, just add salt) is a lot more essential than different damage types of common soldiers.

In the end, it all comes to one's own opinions, of course.

Besides, if talked about immersion and such, I think there are many other ways to add that than just common damage types (time to duck and cover ). For example (this being just a hearsay), the thing about ancient Roman javelin was the special way its tip was manufactured. The foremost part was hard iron and just behind it the iron was relatively soft. So, when such a javelin was thrown and blocked by a shield, the foremost part would penetrate it, and latter would bend by the weight of the shaft. End result: the heavy javelin is stuck in the shield which is left quite unusable by the addition of extra weight. Implement that!

(Of course, I'm not imagining such implementation would be usable, if it wasn't clear from the context. The point being, you actually have to stop at some level when making a game, at least if you want to get it ready some day. And I confess, still have traumas from playing RoleMaster)

[licker]

Originally posted by Taqwus:

More complexity does not necessarily equal better, but it guarantees a heck of a lot more work.

Yep, I think this is the major disadvantage of this system. It requires not only more work from the devs, but more work from the players. While there are certainly some players that want this added tedium, there are (apparently) also several that think its merely complexity for the sake of complexity.

Beyond the difficulty to *accuratly* model a system like this (which isn't all that big of a deal really from a game mechanic point of view), the problem lies in what is the benefit to game play. For some there is a benefit, for some there isn't, and for some the system would actually be a detriment. At this point I think the pro side would be better off asking or hoping that such a system can somehow be added as a mod, and the devs can let the community with its near infinate time (though not wisdom ) work out the details on their own, if a mod appears which gains popular acclaim, then maybe it can be added in a patch, or saved for Dom3 (should such a project be undertaken).

I remain unconvinced that such a system adds anything meaningful to the game play of Dom and I hope that the pro side of this discussion can find a new line of reasoning to continue with, the more is better arguement is past its time.

[Saber Cherry]

Regardless of whether Illwinter puts damage types into the game...

If the game is made to support different damage types, and armors/units are allowed to have protection bonuses versus different damage types, the game would be completely unchanged, and I would say... with minimal effort expended.

Then, some silly person like me could come out with a mod that does the tedious labor of associating types with weapons, and bonuses with units and armors. And people who think it is fun could use it.

But for this to happen, support must be built into the game code.

-Cherry

[Saber Cherry]

Originally posted by atul:

Anyway, the blunt side for soft targets and crushing the bones below armour. And the spike side to act as a can opener for heavy armour.

So, were the distinction Slashing/Crushing/Piercing damage applied, this particular weapon should act as crushing or piercing, dependent on which kind of armour is attacked (we assume that the soldier wielding a hammer can make an intelligent decision).

Quite makes aforementioned distinction obsolete.

No... it would be a dual-typed Crush/Pierce weapon, automatically using the best type for a given armor.

[HJ]

There have been a lot of generalizations in this thread lately. Ok.

It's hard for me to understand people complaining about how you cannot model this system realistically, and how this would not add enough variety, and yet they swear by the system that depends on *random dice*.

"Hey John, before you hit me with that sword, let's throw a dice and see whether you'll cut my arm or my ear off". Right. Keep on complaining how this system would be unrealistic and not model things properly.

Furthermore, random dice effectively makes all your units very similar in performance. If you like systems like AoW2, where a halfling slinger can kill a dragon without a problem because of the huge random factor in combat resolution, then we fundametally disagree on what we want to see in games. I want to see difference and gradation between units, you want to see everybody performing pretty much the same. The expensive units are just a waste of resources, since this is not backed up by their elevated performance, and you're better off just massing units instead of doing some decision making in the process.

And yes, let the comp do all the work. All I want to do is click end turn, and the comp can do everything else. This is a game after all, so why bother?

An if you consider tactical and strategical decisions to be classified as "micromanagement", then what do you call browsing through menus and changing orders every turn? I shudder to think what would you say if there were rumours about implementation of tactical control over the battles.

As I said, since the "pro people" should think this or that, I guess I simply don't understand some things.

[ October 14, 2003, 16:56: Message edited by: HJ ]

[Nerfix]

This system could/would/will work if it is balanced and well thougth out, but i am fine with the current system, and i see no real need why to add this. Thus, this would require piles of extra work for IW. Of course, if this gets added, and it is balanced(Arco doesn't get totaly pooped when enemy sends pierce-resisting troops/critters) and well thougth out, i would be more than happy.

[Zerger]

Ok here it goes, what Illwinter will have to do :

1. Release the mod tools
2. Wait for player input, and tweak the AI if it will require it.
3. Add this system.

I do not really like Saber's Posts, they are usually pointless and idiotic, but this idea is very good, I must agree.

[ October 14, 2003, 17:18: Message edited by: Zerger ]