Jump to content
CyberCrunch

visual combat experience (immersive gameplay)

Recommended Posts

In the last couple of weeks lots of good ideas for the combat mechanics of DU have come up.

This got me thinking what the visual "experience" during combat will be.

 

I highly value realism in games, because it creates an atmosphere for truly immersive gameplay.

 

However DU will not be a simulation game, but a MMO first and foremost.

Therefore we already know that combat system will be based on a tab targeting, because it only creates minimal server load.

The risk about tab targeting is that this system could create a combat experience like many other MMOs have (most famously WoW):

3QQ6fPf.png

This supposedly "epic" combat is just a bunch of avatar-goo with damage effects all over the place. I hate this. -.-

This is actually quite typical for "fantasy genre" MMOs, and of course not what NQ is trying to build.

 

 

- The first issue I see with MMOs is the visual "feedback" players get for their attacks.

It's actually useful to see what effect your attack has made, and see which class the other players are so a group can focus fire a certain enemy.

However to fill the screen with numbers and flashing colors just breaks the immersion.

I would suggest keeping combat effects as subtle as possible.

As this is a Sci-Fi game there could actually be a realistic explanation for overlaid stats. e.g. as augmented reality created by retinal implants. The effects should have a similar design to the overlay for building mechanics that we already see in the game. The combat overlay could then even be further upgraded/customized for different classes/roles in combat...

(Edit: E.g. A gunner needs more information about enemy shields/hull-structure, but a medic would just need health information about his comrades, and a engineer would need to know the current status of different ship parts... thereby unnecessary information could be hidden, without actually obstructing players in battle!(to elaborate Kurocks suggestion))

VzIY7TL.png

This image shows the interface in Battlefield, which is a perfect example for subtle overlays. This design should be applied for DU combat too.

So ->no life bars, ->no numbers, ->just a little Icon that determines the faction and type of the targets.

 

- The second issue of tab targeting is that people have to be very close to each other to deal any damage.

I would like to see a more realistic range of at least 200m. I know DU won't be a shooter game, but I see no reason why we couldn't make it "feel" a bit more shooter-like. ;)

A lot of MMOs already have a more shooter like mechanic called "action combat". Thereby it's necessary to actually have the target always in the crosshairs, otherwise the attacks just don't hit at all. A good example would be Elder Scrolls Online. 

The targeting mechanic would also allow to have some sort of cover behind voxels, as targeting would be based on an actual "hitbox".

 

With this mechanic a player could run into his ship for cover. As soon as the ships voxels are covering the line of sight to his avatar, he's no longer targetable. However now his ships core unit would still be targetable, which has a lot more HP.

 

 

- This actually raises another issue: The combat system should not distinguish between AvA and CvC. If an Avatar shoots at a construct it should just be a normal attack with the according hitbox of the core unit as a target.

In total the game would need 3 different types of targets:

1 Avatars

2 Core Units (bigger core = bigger hitbox)

3 Turrets (turrets inside core units should have their own hitbox)

(Edit: Maybe even other functional components, to create more variation in combat(to elaborate Lethys suggestion))

If these types of targets reach 0 HP they just explode, leaving a wrackage behind. Everything else is just not targetable, and can only be destroyed by mining it with the nanoformer.

This should be good enough to create very interesting combat situations, without fancy voxel damage calculations like in Space Engineers! :D

 

Ok this last part has drifted a bit off topic, but I hope you get my idea for a immerging combat experience.

So what do you think? Is realism important, or do you like colorfull fireworks like in WoW?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-The combat is not tab target

-Ui on ships can be customized. You choose which widget to display and its appearance.

-Ui on foot depends on the features and info they'll need to display, but from my understanding they want to keep it rather clean (some of the ui will be in the arm hologram)

 

I didn't read the rest, i've no time sry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, similar to the guy above me: I don't know where you got the Idea of the Tab Targeting and then on top of it concluding it creates less server load. The actual Targeting Method (You choosing your Target) is Client sided. It has nothing to do with the Server.

 

To the rest of your article: I got the feeling that you are basing most of your Ideas on speculation and somewhat incomplete knowledge about the topic regarding UI-Design. I don't want to offend you, but thats what it seems to me. Also: I would not worry too much about this right now. You can see that they are treating the whole User Interface Experience serious (they show that in a lot of the Dev-Diarys) and without actually playing the game I don't think we will really know what a good UI should be like for this MMO. Since there is none out there that you really can compare it to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tbh, I don't think this will be an issue because in NQ we trust. ;) And if it does become an issue, then we are here to point it out.  Like those orange rings for space flight trajectory: they do seem a bit too solid to me.  But to paraphrase JC: this is pre-alpha and everything is non-final.

 

This is by no means putting down your concerns.  And discussions like these do raise other interesting ideas.  Like I would like to customize avatar HUDs maybe based on equipment worn.  It's a thought.

 

Have fun and keep posting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You confuse tab-targeting with WoW's TAB targeting. What NQ goes for is Active Lock-on. Your center of your screen is where you "lock" a target by aiming at them and the "attakc cycle" is like "Casting a fireball" in WoW.

 

Tab-targeting refers to the old-school RPGs of using dice-rolls to determine hits.

 

750f5439f1ea9e02ad306c8bf6d42eb9.png

This is EVE's hit formula. Something SIMILAR is what NQ said they go for.

 

Gaze at this. This is the most realistic dice-roll system ever made. It means the faster you go in relevance to how "wquick" the attacker is , the hit-chnace can vary, as well as your signature radius in oppositon to the attacker's Scan Resoilution means yo ucan "dodge" an attack competitely, but at the same time, it means "you need to keep the target at a certai nrange so you won't be rofl-stomped when people get too close to your to be able to react.

 

 

See, people thin that shooting IRL, is like in CoD. In real life, eyes, head, torso and arms, don't move at the same time. That's only present in CoD or "super-soldier" movies, where the soldiers are depicted as omniscient war machines. There is a reason why SMGs are used in close quarters and it's not just for the rate of fire, that's an outcome of their main use. Can you tell which it is? It's thier WEIGHT.

 

So, in DU, the hit formula would be something like the hit formula for EVE, but with differnet factors for determining your tracking speed (how fast you can move your gun and keeping a steady aim) and "accuracy" which increases your range of optimal engagement (optimal range = no miss, but before the size radius of the defender).

 

How can NQ implement "signature radius" in AvA ? SImple, your "Crosshair" gages the target's profile in regards to you. That may sound as "hurr durr, that needs ray-casting" but it doesn't, EVE does the exact same thing on its algorithms and it does it without ray-casting. So, the larger your "cone of fire" is, the less hit chance you got at hiting a standard sized target at range is. Of couirse , that can be a value thatr varies depending on weapon type to weapon type, but the principle is solid as far as math goes.

 

 

DU is programmed with a mathematics model in mind. Everything is based on algortihms - the combat as well. The aforementioned formula? You wont't ever have to use it. You'll have stats on your character, saying "youi can track 0.5 Radians / sec" which increases in meters / second at certain ranges. You'll also have an "optimal range" to know within what meters your gun will be effective. And you'll also have indicators of speeds. You see a target that has a Transversal Speed SMALLER than your optimal range? It means you can shoot them at 100% hit-chance after sizes are gaged.

That may sound "simple" or boring... until you realise you can move in certain angles that can throw your enemy's aim off. People in EVE  have been figuring out PERFECT ANGLES, of moving away from an opponent that mitigates the damage taken - that's what in EVE, we call Speed-Tanking ,moving fast enough and keeping range so to kite an opponent.

 

 

It also makes sniping realistic. If you MOVE as a sniper, you lose hit-chance, if you remain idle you get to pick targets at a distance one by one an dealing a LOT of damage, since your Tracking pseed exceeeds their angular velocity - I won't even bother getting into the math of PErfect Strikes in the fomrula i linked above. This also leaves room for Spotters - yes , you know Spotters? The guys that keep snipers ali9ve? YTeah, Spotters, the guys that have no place in Arma or Battlefielld???? YEah, EVE Online has a place for spotters, but not the "realistic miltiary Kek".

 

Your spotter can "amp" your hit chance while keeping your protected in case someone sneaks up to you.

 

So yeah, the combat will be realistic. Real snipers don't run and gun. Real combat is about tactics and rigid reflexes on any action. Real combat is about protocol and doing things by the book - no yelling in chat, no "pro mlg" shit, you got a role, you practise your role in combat. You need to play SMART in DU, not like an animal. This is not Battlefield. You die, you lose your armor and gun - and they may be expensive if they are high grade. IF they are not yours, your FACTION has to pay for them. If you died cause of YOUR mistake - and trust me, people will know if you did something bad, like a "Leeroy" - you'll be demoted to cannon-fodder. 

 

 

 

As for your last 3 questions.

1) Avatars I just explaiend.

2) Avatan combat for ships can be adjusted with signature rradius being a ship's Cross-Section. google what a cross-section is. And...that's it. That's the CvC combat, adjusted AvA.

 

3) Turrets HAVE their own hit-box, EVERYTHING has its own hit-box.  how easy it iwll be to HIT a turret, is also a matter of "signature radius". A turret is FAR smaller than the ship they are on. It's why STarfightrers wil lbe prefered against Turret.s Starfighters = small signature radiiuus = hard to hit. But starfighters = smaller caliber guns = better scan resolution and tracking = can attack turrets easier and up close, as turres are HARD at turning around and shooting at a fast moving starfighter. Also, this WHY sStarfighters are superior in CQB.

 

 

 

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Tab-targeting refers to the old-school RPGs of using dice-rolls to determine hits.

 

 

tab-targeting refers to the use of a button to target (clearly, the button I'm referring to is the TAB key on keyboards, since it was (and it is) the one usually predefined by most mmorpgs as the target button), it has nothing to do with the hit and damage calculations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah ok, so you don't want to be able to destroy comms, navigation, thrusters, power supply, reactors, fuel tanks and so on. Lame combat system if you can't weaken the enemy by destroying different parts and you actually need to think about designs where vital systems like thrusters are covered.

 

Not a very good idea imho. But luckily they already said you'll spawn a damage bubble with a turret attack and everything will be damaged.

 

To the rest: just change the ui with lua and do it yourself instead of demanding nq to do your work :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tab-targeting refers to the use of a button to target (clearly, the button I'm referring to is the TAB key on keyboards, since it was (and it is) the one usually predefined by most mmorpgs as the target button), it has nothing to do with the hit and damage calculations. 

So, I gues your Control + T on Google Chrome for New Tab opens a new TAB Button ? How many new buttons can I open that way?

 

 

Tab-targeting refers to a list of skills and attibutes on the days of Turn-Based RPGs. You chose a skill and targeted the enemy on theo ther side of the screen with a homing attack that used Dice Rolls to tdetemrine hit-chance. WoW, is just a real time Tab-Targeting game. So is EVE, so is DU, what DU goes for though, is what msot games do since Tabula Rasa came out - use your crosshair as your "mouse-over"castiing of an attack. A pseudo-shooter mechanism. It gives the illusion of you actively aiming, but the whole system is still Dice-Roll - Look up TERA Online for more info. 

 

You, like most people, got a distorted view of the term after WoW had [TAB] to switch targets with. Funny how the NIOOB way of targeting in WoW is why most people have the wrong idea about what Tab-Targeting is... it's like nooblords are everywhere. Actual 2200 Rating PvPers in WoW (like myself) used Mouse-Over macros targeting without having to "Frame" a person, so we wouldn't have to use Tab to switch targets in 5vs5 arena.

 

Yes, you can use Mouse-Over macros in WoW. And noobs still don't know it's possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great, I'm happy that my apprehensions regarding tab targeting were not necessary.

To be honest I haven't found the time to read all the other topics about the DU combat system, that's why I felt the need to post this suggestion.

 

What Twerk an Lethys posted is of course far better than that simple "action combat" system I was thinking about!

 

What do you think about the UI design I mentioned?

Do we need life bars, and status popups, or do more subtle icons provide enough information in combat?

 

Here is a better image of the Battlefield icons I mentioned:

battlefield-4-classes-tips.jpg

This could be adapted to DU-Icons, like avatar, core unit, turret,  engine, reactor, comms, and what not...

 

I know it might be a bit early to discuss this, as there will be no combat during the alpha-phase.

But we could still share our opinions for what is necessary for "immersive" combat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great, I'm happy that my apprehensions regarding tab targeting were not necessary.

To be honest I haven't found the time to read all the other topics about the DU combat system, that's why I felt the need to post this suggestion.

 

What Twerk an Lethys posted is of course far better than that simple "action combat" system I was thinking about!

 

What do you think about the UI desing I mentioned?

Do we need life bars, and stat popups, or do more subtle icons provide enough information in combat?

 

Here is a better image of the Batlefield icons I mentioned:

battlefield-4-classes-tips.jpg

This could be adapted to DU-Icons, like avatar, core unit, turret,  engine, reactor, comms, and what not...

 

I know it might be a bit early to discuss this, as there will be no combat during the alpha-phase.

But we could still share our opinions for what is necessary for "immersive" combat.

I don't know, EVE has a solid HP UI, showing you your Shield HP, your Armor HP, your Strucutre HP (your final HP before dying, or the "GET THE HECK OUTTA DODGE" HP)  and then your energy levels. It's simple, takes very little space on the screen and it's easy to keep track of without being distracting.

 

EVE also has some neat sound effects like alarms for when your shields hit a scertain evle. I for example, since I am playing Armor HP focused ships, have my Shield Alarm ghoing off if it loses even 1% HP, and utilise it as a "you are under attack" warning. 

 

For DU, I'd say NQ can go with a SORT of Planetside 2 UI. - or the Mass Effect like UI, over overlapping - HP bars.|

See, if you have a support teammate that can remotely recharge your shields, you need to know when to ask for "Boost my Shield". So, you do need an HP indicator of when your Shield is going down - or an audio cue, as mentioned before.

 

If those things on the image you linked are "role" icons, I guess it's fitting. I SHOULD be able to tell which one of my guys is the medic so I can rush to them. Or who is the combat engineer to have my armor repaired or my shields recharged. Heck, have those icons tied to an organisation's role chart as well. Saves time.

 

If those icons are for a map overview, I guess we should just use mass +  vectors. I.e. "1 ton target, moving towards us at 1000 m /s ". Thart kind of thing. As for detaield maps, I'd say yes, BUT, only if a scouit was sent to map a base of the enemy while infiltrating them, Like "this is the ammunitions' depot building and this is where they have their Res-Node".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice to read you CyberCrunch,

 

I'm not sure to understand you well, it would be better if you organize and sum up better your ideas.

 

For now, I feel that you have a wrong idea about DU gameplay: DU will be probably close to Space Engineers, Minecraft or Avorion for the building/fighting/gameplay part, with in addition a MMO aspect ( hundred or even thousand of people playing on a unique instance).

 

Comparing DU to a MMORPG (that's what WOW is) does not really make sense, because the kind of game and so the gameplay are pretty different. NQ said there will be few "RPG" or "survival" gameplay in DU for the release, excepting the skill tree or the craft tree.

 

The technological breakthrough that NovaQuarks is branding aim to push forward the limits about player numbers and 3D calculations. So I suspect that NQ is developping a kind of physical damage model similar to the model of Space Engineers (remember that SE landscape is made of voxels, just like all DU superstructures). That could explain why CvC was a streach goal, everybody can understand that developping such a thing is complicated...Not speaking about balancing all the data.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say that having some very clear *hostile target* ui would be very helpful on the PVP side of things. If it ends up being something that we can script, even better. This would give us a chance to make pilot display a part of the ship-building process, and ship designers would be encouraged to take the time to add an elegant, maybe showy IU to their ship.

 

I could see a sniper ship for example needing a bit more info on its UI than a dogfighter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, similar to the guy above me: I don't know where you got the Idea of the Tab Targeting and then on top of it concluding it creates less server load. The actual Targeting Method (You choosing your Target) is Client sided. It has nothing to do with the Server.

 

To the rest of your article: I got the feeling that you are basing most of your Ideas on speculation and somewhat incomplete knowledge about the topic regarding UI-Design. I don't want to offend you, but thats what it seems to me. Also: I would not worry too much about this right now. You can see that they are treating the whole User Interface Experience serious (they show that in a lot of the Dev-Diarys) and without actually playing the game I don't think we will really know what a good UI should be like for this MMO. Since there is none out there that you really can compare it to.

So just to add some clarification to server load. I'm not sure exactly what OP is referring to but tab targeting/active lock on systems are considered much less server intensive then your standard FPS style. I believe start citizen is trying for a more standard fps style of combat.

 

The 2 primary reasons:

 

1)In a standard fps the projectiles from your gun/ship must exist in the world as objects on the server. This allows the handling of things like collision with something other then the intended target. In a tab target system the projectiles are simply graphics in many cases rendered purely on the client. If someone passes in front of them the projectile will go through them since the target is the targeted/locked enemy.

 

2)In a tab target/active lock on system high levels of precision are not necessary. This allows devs to use far less frequent server updates. If a standard fps has low update rates to the server you will see a lot of dying behind walls, missed shots that look like they hit and the game will feel very poorly done. In tab target systems since you dont need to have the hyper accurate position of the projectile and the target you can use less frequent updates and interpolation techniques to still create a good combat feel. To put numbers to this in most fps games you will update the server with your position 60 times a second. Many games the server will update you 20-60 times a second. With DU's proposed targeting and combat system you could probably get away with as little as 10 (maybe even less) on close targets and less then 1 if the target is far enough away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So just to add some clarification to server load. I'm not sure exactly what OP is referring to but tab targeting/active lock on systems are considered much less server intensive then your standard FPS style. I believe start citizen is trying for a more standard fps style of combat.

 

The 2 primary reasons:

 

1)In a standard fps the projectiles from your gun/ship must exist in the world as objects on the server. This allows the handling of things like collision with something other then the intended target. In a tab target system the projectiles are simply graphics in many cases rendered purely on the client. If someone passes in front of them the projectile will go through them since the target is the targeted/locked enemy.

 

2)In a tab target/active lock on system high levels of precision are not necessary. This allows devs to use far less frequent server updates. If a standard fps has low update rates to the server you will see a lot of dying behind walls, missed shots that look like they hit and the game will feel very poorly done. In tab target systems since you dont need to have the hyper accurate position of the projectile and the target you can use less frequent updates and interpolation techniques to still create a good combat feel. To put numbers to this in most fps games you will update the server with your position 60 times a second. Many games the server will update you 20-60 times a second. With DU's proposed targeting and combat system you could probably get away with as little as 10 (maybe even less) on close targets and less then 1 if the target is far enough away.

In some gamess they do try to use boundary for "graphcal" ocollsiion to negate dmg. i.e. in EVE, Smartbombs create a "wall" or "bubl"E in their AoE that applies dmg to missiles and blocks them.

 

 

In WoW, the Death Knight ability Anti-Magiz Zone (or something) turns projectiles and particle effectts transparent thyen moment the two effects "meet", thuis creating the illusion the Anti-Magic Zone "blocked" the hit.

 

 

IMO this could be done in DU with shiedls. I.E. treating shots that were unbintentioanllay "blocked" as "glancing hits" off of another ship

's shield .

 

It's smoke and mirrors at its finest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So just to add some clarification to server load. I'm not sure exactly what OP is referring to but tab targeting/active lock on systems are considered much less server intensive then your standard FPS style. I believe start citizen is trying for a more standard fps style of combat.

 

The 2 primary reasons:

 

1)In a standard fps the projectiles from your gun/ship must exist in the world as objects on the server. This allows the handling of things like collision with something other then the intended target. In a tab target system the projectiles are simply graphics in many cases rendered purely on the client. If someone passes in front of them the projectile will go through them since the target is the targeted/locked enemy.

 

2)In a tab target/active lock on system high levels of precision are not necessary. This allows devs to use far less frequent server updates. If a standard fps has low update rates to the server you will see a lot of dying behind walls, missed shots that look like they hit and the game will feel very poorly done. In tab target systems since you dont need to have the hyper accurate position of the projectile and the target you can use less frequent updates and interpolation techniques to still create a good combat feel. To put numbers to this in most fps games you will update the server with your position 60 times a second. Many games the server will update you 20-60 times a second. With DU's proposed targeting and combat system you could probably get away with as little as 10 (maybe even less) on close targets and less then 1 if the target is far enough away.

 

Just to be clear. There is a difference between Tab Targeting (This is something the User does by using his Keyboard ) - what OP wrote - and the game mechanic of not being a FPS but being a 'lock on' game. To give a famous (at least in Germany) quote: "It's like comparing an apple and a Pear . The one thing is a mechanical Part of the User giving Input to the game and the other thing is a gameplay Part of the Game being 'lock on' and not FPS. I was just  stating the OP's mistake in making clear what he meant.

That a 'lock on' System (Also known as Ray Tracing) is less stress on the Server than an actual '(FPS) - Projectile - Collision' - System is given.

Btw: your description of less server updates and less precision is just plainly wrong #(2) in your Reply. The server just does not have to make as much calculations in the 'lock on' System (because it does not have to calculate Projectiles and their Collision but only one line (a Ray Trace) - the constant Collision calculation of a moving Object is the costly part on the other System). They both are precise and accurate (The 'lock  on' System just has a given Target, the 'Projectile' System has no target but a direction and just happens to maybe hit something on its way through space). I mostly feel like people here talk about stuff they have no clue about (I mean there is no problem with that - the thing I have a Problem is if those people make it seem like their wrong statements where facts. Because then other People who don't know about such stuff believe you and have the wrong Idea too without even realising it).  What you talked about was something about networking and Server side Interpolation of Client input. What you stated in #1 is mostly correct though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My choice for a targeting system is crosshairs.  The longer the target stays in your crosshairs the better chance for a hit and greater damage.  The crosshairs should change colors as the duration within the crosshair increases.  Tab targeting should could used for shooting missiles or torpedoes with a percentage chance to hit (dependant on pilot skill and technology level of the weapon).  I also like the idea that different parts of the ship can be damaged or destroyed, especially since the ship is "pieced" together.  Therefore, you can have hull breaches, knock out engines, comms, weapon systems, power systems, etc.

 

As for the UI display, you should have a minimal size HP bar for overall structure, power output, see only the damage you are doing (not everybodies dmg), etc...  Also, you should be able to toggle these and other features on or off depending on users (and usefulness) so as not to fill up the screen with tons of information blocking the actual battlescene.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear. There is a difference between Tab Targeting (This is something the User does by using his Keyboard ) - what OP wrote - and the game mechanic of not being a FPS but being a 'lock on' game. To give a famous (at least in Germany) quote: "It's like comparing an apple and a Pear . The one thing is a mechanical Part of the User giving Input to the game and the other thing is a gameplay Part of the Game being 'lock on' and not FPS. I was just  stating the OP's mistake in making clear what he meant.

That a 'lock on' System (Also known as Ray Tracing) is less stress on the Server than an actual '(FPS) - Projectile - Collision' - System is given.

Btw: your description of less server updates and less precision is just plainly wrong #(2) in your Reply. The server just does not have to make as much calculations in the 'lock on' System (because it does not have to calculate Projectiles and their Collision but only one line (a Ray Trace) - the constant Collision calculation of a moving Object is the costly part on the other System). They both are precise and accurate (The 'lock  on' System just has a given Target, the 'Projectile' System has no target but a direction and just happens to maybe hit something on its way through space). I mostly feel like people here talk about stuff they have no clue about (I mean there is no problem with that - the thing I have a Problem is if those people make it seem like their wrong statements where facts. Because then other People who don't know about such stuff believe you and have the wrong Idea too without even realising it).  What you talked about was something about networking and Server side Interpolation of Client input. What you stated in #1 is mostly correct though.

So what i said in 2 is correct. Its not just a technical issue, its a game play issue. The server does not need a higher update rate to know what was happening in many cases but the player will hate the game if you have a classic fps "projectile system" with low update rates.

 

As an example in a true fps if each players sends 1 update per second(for the sake of argument assume 0 ms response time). The shooter is always behind in time compared to the person being shot. The shooter sees your last update(or in some cases 2 or 3 updates behind) to the server which is sent to the shooter. If my last update shows me in a door,  the shooter sees me in a door, takes a shot and hits me. On my screen i was far past the door(i am 1 second in the future compared to the shooter) and should not be able to be hit, but i wont get the info that i was shot until 1 second later(this assumes favor the shooter mechanics). This creates a very bad feeling in my eyes that i was "shot behind a wall" the more updates to the server the less time delay between action and result the better the combat feels. in an active lock/tab target on this type of mechanic is less troublesome because the assumption is oh the shooter locked me in the door and fired then the bullet simply traveled through the wall. He did lock me at some point and that's all that matters

 

As far as precision: update 1 is A the next update is B. how does the server know what i did between A and B. Normally it doesn't, it knows i was at A and went to B so it renders my character going from A to B on the shooters screen, this is server interpolation. The server knows where i was and knows where i will be so it can assume i move from A to B probably at w/e speed i was going at A. If you are doing high update rates for the most part this is fine. there isn't much variation in movement between A and B when dealing with 1/60th of a second. however in a situation where you only update 1 time a second. lets say A I'm on one side of a thin poll, one second later at B I'm on the other side of the poll. My body was never fully covered by the poll but at the time of the shot my head was. Did i run behind or in front of that poll? I know i ran behind it but the server cant know. In a true fps if i ran in front of it and someone shot at me i die to a headshot, behind it and the bullet hits the poll. In a tab target or lock on system I'm never fully covered by the poll, line of sight isn't lost so in this example the poll isn't relevant. In short people expect far less precise aiming in a tab target system(seeing as how you cant aim) so devs can be far more liberal with the use of server interpolation without a negative impact on game play experience because precise aiming is not core to that game play experience.

 

What this means is to have a satisfying "projectile system" you MUST update far more frequently then a tab target system. Which causes far more server load. Tab targeting, since precise aiming is not required, has much more forgiveness from the players gameplay experience and server interpolation techniques can be used with larger blocks of time, 5-10 updates per second(maybe even less) instead of 60.

 

Edit: im not saying any game would ever use 1 tick systems just using it as an example. All the same stuff i say here still applies between 5 ticks or 20 or 60 just to a lesser extent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My choice for a targeting system is crosshairs. The longer the target stays in your crosshairs the better chance for a hit and greater damage. The crosshairs should change colors as the duration within the crosshair increases. Tab targeting should could used for shooting missiles or torpedoes with a percentage chance to hit (dependant on pilot skill and technology level of the weapon). I also like the idea that different parts of the ship can be damaged or destroyed, especially since the ship is "pieced" together. Therefore, you can have hull breaches, knock out engines, comms, weapon systems, power systems, etc.

 

As for the UI display, you should have a minimal size HP bar for overall structure, power output, see only the damage you are doing (not everybodies dmg), etc... Also, you should be able to toggle these and other features on or off depending on users (and usefulness) so as not to fill up the screen with tons of information blocking the actual battlescene.

Yeah nice, hooray for campers, snipers and people just lurking in the shadow and stalking youme \o/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great, I'm happy that my apprehensions regarding tab targeting were not necessary.

To be honest I haven't found the time to read all the other topics about the DU combat system, that's why I felt the need to post this suggestion.

 

What Twerk an Lethys posted is of course far better than that simple "action combat" system I was thinking about!

 

What do you think about the UI design I mentioned?

Do we need life bars, and status popups, or do more subtle icons provide enough information in combat?

 

Here is a better image of the Battlefield icons I mentioned:

battlefield-4-classes-tips.jpg

This could be adapted to DU-Icons, like avatar, core unit, turret,  engine, reactor, comms, and what not...

 

I know it might be a bit early to discuss this, as there will be no combat during the alpha-phase.

But we could still share our opinions for what is necessary for "immersive" combat.

 

I think the UI should be VERY customizable to suit the player. While you might want a minimal/realistic based UI I personally like the numbers and healthbars. Honestly besides a little UI clutter and poor placement of icons and such I don't see much wrong with that WoW screen shot.  

 

Giving options is generally the best route to go and should avoid pushing ones preferences on others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say Darkfall's way of showing HP is legit.
 

 

Your crosshair is on someone? You get their HP bar and their name.

 

Yeah nice, hooray for campers, snipers and people just lurking in the shadow and stalking youme \o/

 

 

Nothing can stop the Rokh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

So what i said in 2 is correct. Its not just a technical issue, its a game play issue. The server does not need a higher update rate to know what was happening in many cases but the player will hate the game if you have a classic fps "projectile system" with low update rates.

 

As an example in a true fps if each players sends 1 update per second(for the sake of argument assume 0 ms response time). The shooter is always behind in time compared to the person being shot. The shooter sees your last update(or in some cases 2 or 3 updates behind) to the server which is sent to the shooter. If my last update shows me in a door,  the shooter sees me in a door, takes a shot and hits me. On my screen i was far past the door(i am 1 second in the future compared to the shooter) and should not be able to be hit, but i wont get the info that i was shot until 1 second later(this assumes favor the shooter mechanics). This creates a very bad feeling in my eyes that i was "shot behind a wall" the more updates to the server the less time delay between action and result the better the combat feels. in an active lock/tab target on this type of mechanic is less troublesome because the assumption is oh the shooter locked me in the door and fired then the bullet simply traveled through the wall. He did lock me at some point and that's all that matters

 

As far as precision: update 1 is A the next update is B. how does the server know what i did between A and B. Normally it doesn't, it knows i was at A and went to B so it renders my character going from A to B on the shooters screen, this is server interpolation. The server knows where i was and knows where i will be so it can assume i move from A to B probably at w/e speed i was going at A. If you are doing high update rates for the most part this is fine. there isn't much variation in movement between A and B when dealing with 1/60th of a second. however in a situation where you only update 1 time a second. lets say A I'm on one side of a thin poll, one second later at B I'm on the other side of the poll. My body was never fully covered by the poll but at the time of the shot my head was. Did i run behind or in front of that poll? I know i ran behind it but the server cant know. In a true fps if i ran in front of it and someone shot at me i die to a headshot, behind it and the bullet hits the poll. In a tab target or lock on system I'm never fully covered by the poll, line of sight isn't lost so in this example the poll isn't relevant. In short people expect far less precise aiming in a tab target system(seeing as how you cant aim) so devs can be far more liberal with the use of server interpolation without a negative impact on game play experience because precise aiming is not core to that game play experience.

 

What this means is to have a satisfying "projectile system" you MUST update far more frequently then a tab target system. Which causes far more server load. Tab targeting, since precise aiming is not required, has much more forgiveness from the players gameplay experience and server interpolation techniques can be used with larger blocks of time, 5-10 updates per second(maybe even less) instead of 60.

 

Edit: im not saying any game would ever use 1 tick systems just using it as an example. All the same stuff i say here still applies between 5 ticks or 20 or 60 just to a lesser extent.

 

I guess at that Point we either should discuss this further in PMs or just plainly call a stop to this. Because you seem to have a lot of half true beliefs about the whole System and there is a lot to explain. Us spamming this thread wont do anybody good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess at that Point we either should discuss this further in PMs or just plainly call a stop to this. Because you seem to have a lot of half true beliefs about the whole System and there is a lot to explain. Us spamming this thread wont do anybody good.

Fair enough feel free to pm about the half truths of those statements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...