Combat: Real Time vs. Resolved

[miltonyorkcastle]

This actually connects to the discussion on weapons, since determining the combat will help determine exactly how the weapons will work.

Basically, will combat be "Real Time" like an FPS (i.e. Oblivion) or "Resolved" (Turn-based) like NWN's system, where you just click on the badguy and your guy performs a default combat sequence?

I personally would love to have a "Real Time" combat system. Reach and weapon speed would really make a difference, and even moreso, the timing of attacks would be in control of the player instead of an arbitrary initiative and set of turns.

However, I understand if for the style or perhaps coding ease (I really wouldn't know, though it would seem to me that fewer scripts would have to run for an RT combat system), that we must use a "Resolved" system.

[Pen N Popper]

I'd like to throw in a request for a turn-based option that allows the DM to step one turn at a time. This assumes that people will be able to host their own games. The Fantasy Grounds system is a nice interface for remote P&P style playing, but it's 2D interface lacks the immersive qualities that are possible in 3D systems like NWN. (Things as simple as dressing up your PC to look like you imagine.)

I also will second the realtime system like in Mount&Blade, for example. It's lots of fun to have more of a sense of freeflow to a game rather than swing-pause-swing-pause.

[darkstorme]

While, of course, I can't say what the MMO team is thinking, I can see some problems with realtime combat - namely, added bandwidth required.

While more scripts might have to be run in a resolved system like NWN, they're simpler - generally just weighted random numbers. Calculations for hit and damage in an FPS are far more complicated, because they depend on aim, timing, and precise locations of all combatants.

Additionally (and more important for an MMO), the bandwidth required to keep all this information up-to-date is far greater.

Bandwidth requirements (upload) per client for a NWN server: ~3 KBi/s.
Bandwidth requirements (upload) per client for a Halo PC/Counterstrike server: ~64 Kb/s.

Given that the primary goal in an MMO server is player/player interaction, gaining a bit more interaction in combat at the cost of an eighteen-fold reduction in maximum server capacity seems a bit unreasonable as a trade-off.

[Leanthar]

Darkstorme is pretty much spot on with his post on bandwidth and lag, this is a huge issue.

Combat is action based, not really turn based and we are not going down the FPS path. FPS is fun, don't get us wrong, but for the engine we are using, network congestion/bandwidth/lag/timing, the type of game we are creating, and all sorts of other issues, it just doesn't make sense.

What do we mean by action based you ask? An action is the use of a skill, you use a skill and various things are checked and verified, rolls made, etc. then the outcome is shown via animation and fx (or whatever). Turn based is more of a "pause" type situation and we do not have that, nor will we.

[orth]

Our intentions are a hybrid of sorts where positioning and aim are not automated. If you're facing north and the enemy is south of you, you will not be able to attack. It will not auto turn you to face the enemy nor move to within range. It will give you textual and graphic feedback if you can't reach your opponent.

Whether an enemy is reachable by your attempt is indicated by UI feedback, your cursor will show whether they are able to be attacked as well as your targets 'glow'.

The constraints to which your radius of attack positioning and distance between you and the enemy are somewhat loose, so its definitely not FPS, and it will be tweaked to balance the fun and the gameplay.

Once your enemy is in that 'sweet spot', calculations based on skills/weapon/etc. are then used. Autoattacking kicks in until you or the enemy breaks that sweet spot, so if they move or you do you have to continue to keep the positioning in line for your attack.

With all that said, these intentions could be throw out the window if game play beta testing reveals it to be too difficult or too much of a hog on networking. (standard disclaimer)

[lonnarin]

Hopefully monsters can be tactically "blocked" by player characters then? One of the things that ticked me off about WoW and DAoC was that you'd have a full line of tanks up front and the monster would keep leapfrogging them to instantly whack at the wizard 60 feet away. The thing I like most about NWN's engine for that matter are that you can block critters, or get cornered and trapped in return.