PDA

View Full Version : Improved Combat: My Idea



Wolfmeister1010
11-20-2013, 11:18 PM
Since combat is a big topic right now, I decided to come up with my own idea for a combat system. Please post your criticisms and what not below. And also, before you call me a hypopcrite, just because I defended ACIV's combat does not mean I dont't think it can have improvements.

1. No more slo mo counter system, no more "different counter move assigned to a different button". Countering is triggered by pressing b. similar to Batman Arkham games, where countering is triggered by... I think triangle and Y. Of course this means getting rid of tool counters, disarming counters, and throwing counters, but I think it is a small sacrifice for better combat. This gets rid of the option to use your tool as a quick and easy counter weapon.

2. Each time you counter an enemy, it does not kill them instantly, but rather injures them. For example, grunts can be killed in lower numbers of counters. Again, this is inspiration from Batman.

3. In order to counter, you must press b/circle when the enemy's blow is about to hit you. If you press too early, the counter fails, and you take damage. So basically, the counter window is smaller compared to ACIV, but not TOO small as to make it annoying when you fail and hurt the flow. (THANKS TO SUSHI FOR OPENING MY EYES ABOUT THIS PART)

4. However, you can still parry. If you hold b, you parry, but like ACB, after a few hits, you lose your defense. This time, all enemies continue to attack until they are either countered or strike a blow. The number of times it takes to lower YOUR defense depends on the stats of your weapon and the level of the enemy. Once you have your defense broken, grunts attack once, while elites and agiles and heavies attack twice, and SUPER CAPTAIN OP attacks 3 times.

Points 4 and 3 work together to create a system where you can either risk taking damage and countering....or play it safe, at least for a few seconds, by parrying.

5. Combos: all enemies can "block" your regular attacks, but they don't parry. It is like in ACB where when you attack a grunt, they block, but kinda sloppily. For grunts, you can initiate a combo by doing a few things:

a. Continue to attack until the guard tires out and you can then actually damage him
b. press A/X to break the defense (it takes two times to break a grunt's defense, more for higher ranking enemies) and then damage him in a killing combo. Break defense works like AC1, where you press A while moving forward. Again, it takes more than one defense break to actually break the enemy's defense.


However, there ares still guards who are immune to regular attacks, and continue to parry forever unless you change tactics (explained below in section about different archetypes) enemies must be damages by a certain number f these different tactics in order to open them up for fatal blows. Once enemies become open for fatal blows, they become visibly tired out and injured, signaling you to attack.


6. Dodging returns by pressing A while moving backward, used in tactics to lower enemy's defenses. Works similar to break defense, (both work in same purpose) but used on different enemies. For example, one enemy is immune to break defense so you must use dodging, while another immune to dodging so you must use break defense. Works like AC1 where if you dodge and then immediately attack, it breaks their defense. Doing a dodge and then attack system, takes more than one to kill an enemy, like break defense.

7. Kill streaks: work like Batman, where doing a killstreak doesn't necessarily kill the enemy you are in a streak against. Some enemies are immune to killstreaks, as always.

8. Double Counters: work like Batman, where you must press the counter button twice to counter two enemies. Does not always kill the two enemies, but may just injure them. Eventually, if done against already injured enemies, it may kill them.

Enemy Archetypes: (number in parenthesis represents number of these moves needed to damage or break and enemy's defense) also note that if you damage an enemy before doing things such as countering, it will take less counters to kill them because they are already injured. The below stats are applied to a full health enemy.

For all enemies that can have their defense lowered by being attacked repeatedly, it depends on their level, plus the level of the weapon you have.

Grunt: use break defense (1) or dodge/attack (1) or continue at attacking (depends on strength of weapon) to lower defense, not immune to counters (2) or streaks (1)

Elite: use break defense (2) or continue attacking (takes longer and more attacks than grunt) to lower defense, not immune to counters (2) or streaks (2), immune to dodge attacks

Agile: use dodge/attack (2) or continue attacking to tire (takes same number as grunts but agiles can dodge many of your attacks) to break defense, not immune to counters (2) but are immune to streaks. Immune to break defense.

Captain: use dodge/attack (3) or break defense (3) to lower defense, not immune to counters (3), but are immune to regular attacks. Immune to streaks.

SUPER CAPTAIN OP class: use break defense (4) to lower defense, immune to counters (but does not damage you either, as you can not stop him from attacking you so it would be unfair for you), immune to dodge/attack, immune to streaks. Immune to regular attacks.

Heavies: use break defense (2) or dodge/attack (1) or continue attacking (takes as many as elite) to break defense. Immune to streaks, immune to counters. Heavies throw grenades (in games set in gunpowder ages) and every one of their attacks inflicts massive damage.


Of course, you still have your tools, like guns, throwing knives, depending on where and when the game takes place. As, enemies can not block bullets :p. but like previous games, it take a certain number of these tool attacks to kill or lower their defense.



Well? What do you think? I spent a REALLY long time on this, but can still take criticism. I know this might sound complicated, and this is also a very long post, so if you have any questions I will try to answer them. This combat system is meant to increase difficulty and emphasis on experience, and simplify combat control scheme, giving each button more specific and unique uses.

Sushiglutton
11-20-2013, 11:48 PM
Haven't played AC4 yet, so I'm basing this off AC3 :). Anyway here it goes.



I think the idea that a counter can be followed by four different moves is sound and it adds an extra level of depth. It's something unique for AC so it doesn't feel totally like an Arkham copy paste. I think they should keep building on this idea.
Like it. I think for some archetypes some kind of realistic damage modeling would be awesome. Like for a brute you need to break their leg, or slit their wrist or something (depending on which move you perform). That you need to take down enemies in more stages would add much needed extra layers to the combat.
STRONGLY DISAGREE. Short time windows makes the combat feel clunky. It leads to constant hiccups in the flow and is annoying. There are better ways to ramp up the difficulty such as adding more complexity to the system and tweak damage parameters. Generous time windows is at the core of what makes the Arkham system so satisfying, don't go backwards on this!
Lol I didn't even know you could parry. I think they could just remove it tbh.
This is the kind of things they need to think more about. One hit kills are a bit too swift to be satisfying. There can be special moves that allows you to do that, but in general there needs to be two to three things you must do to kill each enemy (which can be interupted by others attacking).
I don't mind one more defensive move at all. I think your idea of letting the player control when to counter and when to roll/dodge is perfect. it also gives you a move for quick repositioning which would be more than welcome.
Agreed, one or two extra layers here would be awesome. Enemies should NOT be the melee combat equivalent of bullet sponges though. You should be able to kill all enemies fairly quickly if you use a good set of moves.
Problem here is that B-B = counter + throw, so you can't really tap the button twice. Maybe there's other solution?



List of archetypes sound fine. Overall I think this is an excellent post and I agree with the majority of your points. In particular I feel they need to ramp up the complexity for combat by (like you describe), adding more layers to taking down enemies and expand the move set (two defensive moves, some special ones perhaps) and tool set (quickfire!!!). I do NOT think that they should make it technically more difficult to pull off some of the moves (aka shorter time windows).

Landruner
11-21-2013, 12:02 AM
I think your suggestions are really interesting - However; I wish they introduce different archetype of foes or just remove the archetype system and replace it by a leveled system for the foes instead.

Kagurra
11-21-2013, 12:25 AM
The grunt dudes should still die in one counter.

Wolfmeister1010
11-21-2013, 12:42 AM
Haven't played AC4 yet, so I'm basing this off AC3 :). Anyway here it goes.



I think the idea that a counter can be followed by four different moves is sound and it adds an extra level of depth. It's something unique for AC so it doesn't feel totally like an Arkham copy paste. I think they should keep building on this idea.
Like it. I think for some archetypes some kind of realistic damage modeling would be awesome. Like for a brute you need to break their leg, or slit their wrist or something (depending on which move you perform). That you need to take down enemies in more stages would add much needed extra layers to the combat.
STRONGLY DISAGREE. Short time windows makes the combat feel clunky. It leads to constant hiccups in the flow and is annoying. There are better ways to ramp up the difficulty such as adding more complexity to the system and tweak damage parameters. Generous time windows is at the core of what makes the Arkham system so satisfying, don't go backwards on this!
Lol I didn't even know you could parry. I think they could just remove it tbh.
This is the kind of things they need to think more about. One hit kills are a bit too swift to be satisfying. There can be special moves that allows you to do that, but in general there needs to be two to three things you must do to kill each enemy (which can be interupted by others attacking).
I don't mind one more defensive move at all. I think your idea of letting the player control when to counter and when to roll/dodge is perfect. it also gives you a move for quick repositioning which would be more than welcome.
Agreed, one or two extra layers here would be awesome. Enemies should NOT be the melee combat equivalent of bullet sponges though. You should be able to kill all enemies fairly quickly if you use a good set of moves.
Problem here is that B-B = counter + throw, so you can't really tap the button twice. Maybe there's other solution?



List of archetypes sound fine. Overall I think this is an excellent post and I agree with the majority of your points. In particular I feel they need to ramp up the complexity for combat by (like you describe), adding more layers to taking down enemies and expand the move set (two defensive moves, some special ones perhaps) and tool set (quickfire!!!). I do NOT think that they should make it technically more difficult to pull off some of the moves (aka shorter time windows).

Thank you for the kind words. For the double counter thing, I was going of the idea that the b b throw thing would no longer exist. I disagree with the thing about the counters, as I think the shorter the counter window, the better, but I can see your point. And maybe you are right in saying it should not be so much of an Arkham copy. But, for the b b counter thing...i mean, I just hate it so much. The only people who use the throw option are inexperienced newcomers who impulsively smash the block button. At least I think that is how it is. I liked the whole "4 button counter" thing, but I think it kinda hurts the flow.

But then again, maybe you are right about the counter thing. Maybe it doent need to necessarily be HARDER, But more based on skill. Is that what you are saying? Do you like the counter window for ACIV?

Now that I think about it, the counter window for Arkham is probably just as long as ACIV. Hmm, you are right. Would it be lame of me to change that part of my post if I cite you??

AdamPearce
11-21-2013, 02:12 AM
Looks good, but you didn't talk about the actual kills. Because yes, combat is the way you fight but in this case, it's the way you kill, so I think it is really important to give satisfaying kill animations and not some back camera thing. I mean, if I rush 5 minutes to kill a SUPER OP CAPTAIN, I want it to be rewarding and not just a crappy slow-motion with a cover sound.

I would like a special animation for each kills depending on the way you do it. The more it's skilled and inventive, the better it looks. With your system, the fights would get very long and hard too, but still long. So we would rarely see two kills back-to-back. Knowing this, I think it would be awesome to have slow-mo active animation for the kills. Not effects and stuuf, just epicness. A little bit like the slow-mo on the final kills, but it more developped and aesthetic. With some facial animations and a 'fear' system this could be really interesting.

Sushiglutton
11-21-2013, 02:23 AM
Thank you for the kind words. For the double counter thing, I was going of the idea that the b b throw thing would no longer exist. I disagree with the thing about the counters, as I think the shorter the counter window, the better, but I can see your point. And maybe you are right in saying it should not be so much of an Arkham copy. But, for the b b counter thing...i mean, I just hate it so much. The only people who use the throw option are inexperienced newcomers who impulsively smash the block button. At least I think that is how it is. I liked the whole "4 button counter" thing, but I think it kinda hurts the flow.

But then again, maybe you are right about the counter thing. Maybe it doent need to necessarily be HARDER, But more based on skill. Is that what you are saying? Do you like the counter window for ACIV?

Now that I think about it, the counter window for Arkham is probably just as long as ACIV. Hmm, you are right. Would it be lame of me to change that part of my post if I cite you??


Ah, you were correct about B-B. I forgot you removed the counter system as it works now. Your system is consistent, my misstake!


When it comes to the counter window it's about what preferences you have. I am not that fast and I struggle in games with really precise timing. I prefer if the challenge is more about figuring out good strategies and choosing the correct move at the right time (preferably there should be a number of feasible moves in most situations). I don't think the challenge has to be about surviving, I'm ok if it's about just making the fight look good. I just prefer if the combat is more about ideas and less about reflexes.

Megas_Doux
11-21-2013, 02:31 AM
Pretty good ideas, but many will complain about how hard the new system is..Letīs face it, AC has one of the most whiny fanbases ever, and Ubisoft is aware of that.

Sushiglutton
11-21-2013, 02:39 AM
Pretty good ideas, but many will complain about how hard the new system is..Letīs face it, AC has one of the most whiny fanbases ever, and Ubisoft is aware of that.

We will whine either way though ;). Ubi might as well create a deeper and more engaging combat system that they enjoy playing themselves.

Wolfmeister1010
11-21-2013, 02:39 AM
Ah, you were correct about B-B. I forgot you removed the counter system as it works now. Your system is consistent, my misstake!


When it comes to the counter window it's about what preferences you have. I am not that fast and I struggle in games with really precise timing. I prefer if the challenge is more about figuring out good strategies and choosing the correct move at the right time (preferably there should be a number of feasible moves in most situations). I don't think the challenge has to be about surviving, I'm ok if it's about just making the fight look good. I just prefer if the combat is more about ideas and less about reflexes.

No worries! I really enjoy these types of discussions. I agree with you as well, and if you notice, I have changed my counter idea a but in the OP, with of course citing you as the prophet behind the idea.

Sushiglutton
11-21-2013, 02:41 AM
No worries! I really enjoy these types of discussions. I agree with you as well, and if you notice, I have changed my counter idea a but in the OP, with of course citing you as the prophet behind the idea.

Haha ok thanks! Sushi the prophet :cool:!

LoyalACFan
11-21-2013, 02:44 AM
Sorry, but I'm not a fan of most of these ideas. The problem with lifting too many elements from Batman is that Batman only uses his fists, whereas in AC you're usually using razor-sharp blades. Batman can get away with having to punch his enemies multiple times (plus the comic-book nature allows for some huge tough-guy archetypes that require literally dozens of blows to finish), but if AC's more real-world-based enemies start withstanding upwards of half a dozen sword slashes, it's going to feel extremely cheesy and gamey. Especially the counters; if you counter a guy and create a window by wounding him, why wouldn't you just finish him off while you had the chance?

IMHO the actual combat mechanics are fine, it's just the AI that needs to be turned up. Make enemies attack much quicker with a smaller counter window, make dual attacks occur much more frequently and make them harder to pull off than single counters, and maybe even add a triple attack that you have to evade rather than counter.

Another thing that needs to go are the freaking LONG kill animations. Revelations was the chief offender of the series in this regard. AC4 was actually better about this on the whole, but it still has some insanely long ones (like where Edward grabs a guy's arm, twists it around, punches him in the face with his pommel, stabs him downward in the back of the neck and slowly waits for him to slide off the end of the sword) while his friends just stand idly by politely letting you finish your move. Counter-kills need to be just as quick and simplistic as kill streak moves, and able to be interrupted more frequently by incoming attacks. They could still have those highly-choreographed finishing moves, because they really do look awesome, just not right in the middle of twelve other hostile dudes. Maybe instead of (or in addition to) the zoomed camera for the final kill in a fight, they could make that final kill satisfying by reserving the extravagant cinematic finishers just for the last man standing, to let you finish with a bang in combat and include those badass moves in the game without having them look silly in the midst of a gigantic battle. I'm thinking like 40 or so quick, basic kill animations for the heat of combat, with maybe a dozen or so epic finishers for the last guy. It would make combat more believable, as well as less repetitive since you're not watching the same over-the-top animations used 5 times in one fight.

Wolfmeister1010
11-21-2013, 03:01 AM
Sorry, but I'm not a fan of most of these ideas. The problem with lifting too many elements from Batman is that Batman only uses his fists, whereas in AC you're usually using razor-sharp blades. Batman can get away with having to punch his enemies multiple times (plus the comic-book nature allows for some huge tough-guy archetypes that require literally dozens of blows to finish), but if AC's more real-world-based enemies start withstanding upwards of half a dozen sword slashes, it's going to feel extremely cheesy and gamey. Especially the counters; if you counter a guy and create a window by wounding him, why wouldn't you just finish him off while you had the chance?

IMHO the actual combat mechanics are fine, it's just the AI that needs to be turned up. Make enemies attack much quicker with a smaller counter window, make dual attacks occur much more frequently and make them harder to pull off than single counters, and maybe even add a triple attack that you have to evade rather than counter.

Another thing that needs to go are the freaking LONG kill animations. Revelations was the chief offender of the series in this regard. AC4 was actually better about this on the whole, but it still has some insanely long ones (like where Edward grabs a guy's arm, twists it around, punches him in the face with his pommel, stabs him downward in the back of the neck and slowly waits for him to slide off the end of the sword) while his friends just stand idly by politely letting you finish your move. Counter-kills need to be just as quick and simplistic as kill streak moves, and able to be interrupted more frequently by incoming attacks. They could still have those highly-choreographed finishing moves, because they really do look awesome, just not right in the middle of twelve other hostile dudes. Maybe instead of (or in addition to) the zoomed camera for the final kill in a fight, they could make that final kill satisfying by reserving the extravagant cinematic finishers just for the last man standing, to let you finish with a bang in combat and include those badass moves in the game without having them look silly in the midst of a gigantic battle. I'm thinking like 40 or so quick, basic kill animations for the heat of combat, with maybe a dozen or so epic finishers for the last guy. It would make combat more believable, as well as less repetitive since you're not watching the same over-the-top animations used 5 times in one fight.
Ok y, i can understand your point. One of my biggest issues with combat in AC is the lack of many combat animations. There needs to be WAYY more for each weapon. Any some of the sword animations were recycled from the tomahawk and work so awfully it makes me cringe.

Landruner
11-21-2013, 03:12 AM
That is funny but as soon as someone comes with an idea on that forum, we have 100 people that come with 200 different opinions and at least 300 references about how better or worse the past ACs were. (I know that is a forum and it is normal, and I am not saying that is bad, and that is not my point, okay!) - I just thinking at the poor developer and the poor programmer that can eventually or potentially try to get idea there in order to know what the fan base really wants, they could be lost and just draw a line - Just let the things like they are.

To the OP, like I wrote above, your ideas are nice and could solve some issues regarding the combat system. I do not agree with everything you wrote, but that is a good start, and at least I believe that someone should check them out.

Gi1t
11-21-2013, 03:36 AM
I was thinking earlier today about combat and what I thought it would be like in AC back when they were still working on it.

My impression/hope was that ACs combat would finally discard the age-old "Get hit with a sword" animations. They actually had animations where characters took damage, but instead of getting clocked on the head, they blocked, just not very well, and I thought that was very cool since in a realistic format, getting hit directly would most likely end a fight, so warriors would wear down each others' defenses before going for a killing blow.

Now, I like the idea of enemies dying in just one direct hit in AC (regardless of importance). I think that makes sense. But that doesn't mean they have to go down easy. I was thinking that combat might be structured so that your main fighting moves are designed to beat away at enemy defenses, knock them down, get them out of your way. When you actually want to kill someone (apart from knocking them into an environmental hazard or something like that) you pull, say, the high profile trigger or some other button to move to your killing mode. Trying to deliver a lethal blow would be a lot like using the hidden blade, where a head-on attack wouldn't ever work. The point would be to use your fighting moves to beat away at the enemy's defenses, then when you create an opening, pull the trigger and attack to go for a killing blow.

With this system, you could potentially kill targets very quickly if you knew what you were doing. But here's the biggest issue I think they need to fix; it's been around since the Sands of Time days, really. No having one move that always works against one enemy type. That's a big issue with the current system because it means all you have to do is pick the right move and you win. What they need is for enemies to have distinct attacks and have certain moves work against certain attacks. The combat shouldn't be based on attack v. enemy, but rather attack v. attack. So heavy attacks would, for most enemies, leave an opening for a certain response, but they wouldn't ALWAYS use that attack, so you might end up taking them down in a different way, maybe even a way that's not typical for dealing with that type of enemy. This would allow people to fight the way they prefer more because they can go for a specific opening in an enemy's routine. But overall, enemies need different options for how to attack so that it breaks up the formula. So many of Ubisoft's games have had this issue where the formulaic nature of taking down enemies makes it far too simple. The formula should still work, but enemies should be treated not only based on type but how they choose to attack at any given moment; that would provide the necessary variation in style. :) As for the controls, I like having the basic Weapon Hand, Empty Hand, Feet, Head controls for the buttons and then you use combinations of them to execute more advanced moves. I also think it'd be cool to see them include a feint technique, like pressing X, A to start an attack and interrupt it, faking the enemy out.

So, against a tough enemy, with all these features in place, you'd have to attack him many times to tire him out enough to be able to kill him and you'd probably have to deflect a few counter attacks along the way. Or you can be more evasive and let him attack and tire himself out while you just dodge, but that might take some time too. If you want to take him out right away, you'd need to wait for a certain attack and respond with a specific move of your own to open up his defenses, then press the trigger to go for a killing blow before he can recover. For really though/smart enemies, such attacks might only be triggered by attacks you use. So you might need to do an attack to prompt a counterattack from them and that would be the move you were looking for. Each enemy would have more than one attack you can break through in this way.

EDIT: Oh, to clarify something--when I talk about opening up an enemy's defenses, I'm not just talking about a counter, I'm saying you use a specific counter measure (counterattack/grab/dodge whatever) and THEN use a specific attack technique to follow that up and open up their defenses while they're reeling form whatever you jut did. It wouldn't always be the same pairings (like you might do a counter-grab followed by a guard-break attack in response to a certain enemy trying to grab you.) This would add an extra layer of depth to bringing an enemy down since you'd have to match you attack to the enemy and what attack they used.

Sigv4rd
11-21-2013, 04:57 AM
I feel that different weapons could use a bit more variety in combat...

JazAC3
11-22-2013, 12:38 AM
Finally someone who is trying to really fix assassins creed. Your idea is amazing. If AC can have something like this in the future will be a more amazing game. Batman doesn't have the big open world of ac or the much things to do, but is really famous in the most just by the combat game play.

Wolfmeister1010
11-22-2013, 01:48 AM
Finally someone who is trying to really fix assassins creed. Your idea is amazing. If AC can have something like this in the future will be a more amazing game. Batman doesn't have the big open world of ac or the much things to do, but is really famous in the most just by the combat game play.

Wow thanks!