|
|
|
 |

October 14th, 2003, 11:34 PM
|
BANNED USER
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 126
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Poll: Damage Types
Quote:
Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:
Of course everything would damage everything, just at slightly different levels. Plus they could insure that each race had a variety of pluses and minuses, but not covering everything.
Gandalf Parker
|
Yup.
|

October 15th, 2003, 01:29 AM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: PALMDALE ,CA ,US
Posts: 162
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Poll: Damage Types
"They would be interesting and beneficial  , if designed carefully to have moderate effects."As long its BALANCE.
Thats what i voted for too.
|

October 15th, 2003, 02:52 AM
|
 |
Second Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 477
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Poll: Damage Types
"The system might be nice, but there is such a high chance of ruining a good game with it, that I don't want it in Dom2."
I'm against this. Firstly, it replaces attack and protection with six new stats (at least). Secondly, it requires that certain kinds of armor are made arbitarily weak against certain kinds of damage, for example, plate armor being weak against crushing, even though the only real difference between armors is the protection, weight and cost, which the game already models.
Thirdly, there are already differences in the way that different weapons and armors interact, which provide far more flavor for much less complexity.
|

October 15th, 2003, 04:17 PM
|
Captain
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 990
Thanks: 13
Thanked 15 Times in 14 Posts
|
|
Re: Poll: Damage Types
Heh, I was hoping more people would vote for making it moddable, that's what I voted for. Give the players the tools to improve or destroy the game, always more fun that way 
|

October 15th, 2003, 04:25 PM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Vacaville, CA, USA
Posts: 13,736
Thanks: 341
Thanked 479 Times in 326 Posts
|
|
Re: Poll: Damage Types
Quote:
Originally posted by Sandman:
[QBSecondly, it requires that certain kinds of armor are made arbitarily weak against certain kinds of damage, for example, plate armor being weak against crushing, even though the only real difference between armors is the protection, weight and cost, which the game already models.
[/QB]
|
Hmm this isnt my area but Im not sure I agree with this. As I remember such things in other games platemail was usually great against crushing, but slightly susceptable to piercing weapons that came in thru the chinks. Chainmail was better vs piercing but more susceptable to crush. Both had some armor defense against everything, just slight advantages vs some.
__________________
-- DISCLAIMER:
This game is NOT suitable for students, interns, apprentices, or anyone else who is expected to pass tests on a regular basis. Do not think about strategies while operating heavy machinery. Before beginning this game make arrangements for someone to check on you daily. If you find that your game has continued for more than 36 hours straight then you should consult a physician immediately (Do NOT show him the game!)
|

October 15th, 2003, 05:21 PM
|
BANNED USER
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 410
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Poll: Damage Types
Quote:
Originally posted by licker:
Heh, I was hoping more people would vote for making it moddable, that's what I voted for. Give the players the tools to improve or destroy the game, always more fun that way
|
That is an excellent idea licker, but I doubt that it will happen, because modding that would require heavy scripting more than likely.
|

October 15th, 2003, 06:21 PM
|
 |
Major General
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Crystal Tokyo
Posts: 2,453
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Poll: Damage Types
You know, if weapon damage types were integrated into the game - and especially if dual/multi type weapons were allowed - then the magic weapons could be made more interesting, as well. For example, even if crush/slash/pierce were not used, a magic fire sword could still be dual-typed fire/physical. Then, for example, Caelean armor could be tagged to provide full protection from physical damage, but half protection from fire damage, so a fire sword would cut through them like buttah. Against fire elementals, physical damage would be dealt. And Undead could also be given reduced protection versus fire (or bonus damage from fire) so that they would take extra damage as well. In fact, I think this (undead taking bonus fire damage) is important, after hearing that Banishment has been weakened.
Currently, some weapons are scripted to do bonus damage against certain enemies (miget masher, flambeau) but damage types would allow a more generalized and complete system.
A complete system would have an array for each unit/armor, like this:
fire | ice | elec | gen.magic | crush | pierce | slash | gen.pyhsical
Then, in each Category there would either be an integer, with a protection modifier:
.f | .i. | e | m | c | p | s | gp
0 | -3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 0
In other words, versus ice, the armor would give 3 less protection, and against pierce, 3 extra protection, and so forth.
...or a floating point damage multiplier:
.f | ...i.. | e | m | ..c | ..p. | ..s.. | gp
1 | 1.5 | 1 | 1 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 1
(the extra dots were added for formatting reasons)
In this case, the creature would take 50% extra damage from ice (150% total), and only 80% damage from piercing weapons.
Weapons would simply have a Boolean array, checking each valid damage type, so a Caelean ice lance would look like this:
.f | .i | e | m | c | p | s | gp
0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0
In other words, it would be dual-typed ice and pierce. Against Winter Wolves, which are immune to cold, it would have to resort to physical pierce damage, and thus Caelean weapons would no longer ignore the etherealness of Winter Wolves, but they would for the other 3 spirits.
-Cherry
P.S. In the unit stats screen, only all the active armor modifiers would be shown. So if the entire protection array was 0, no icons would appear. But if the array was all zero except for a -3 ice and +3 pierce, the creature would gain two icons, an ice vulnerability (-3) and a pierce resistance (+3). These would show along with all the other icons (regenerating, trample, mindless, and so forth).
[ October 15, 2003, 17:33: Message edited by: Saber Cherry ]
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|