Combat System Recycled AGAIN? | Forums

[GunnerGalactico]

I would be fine as long as it's an improvement over AC:3's combat and not like AC:IV's. Perhaps a mix between Liberation HD and 3.

Gonna have to say I agree with that 100%

No one ever said they should change it completely.
But it needs LOTS of improvement.

Also agree with that, the combat system doesn't have to be changed drastically. They can tweak it or make a few minor changes. They need to improve enemy AI and their line of sight.

[sushiglutton]

Melee combat is probably my favourite kind of gameplay and to me it has been very disapointing to see Ubi struggle so in this area. I replayed Sands of Time last year and in my honest opinion I feel it has a more entertaining system than any of the AC games. Considering it's over a decade old that's sad.

As for why the combat in AC3 (I'm gonna focus on AC3 as AC4 was pretty much just a simpler version of it) is problematic there are a several reasons:

1. Taking out standard guards is way, way too easy. One succesful counter (very forgiving time window), or a single tap within a killstreak and they go down. There is no room for strategy in a system like that. It requires no focus which means I don't get invested in it.
2. The "watch instead of do" philosophy I criticized for the parkour is very present in the combat as well. Best example is the dual counters. If two enemies attack you tap a single button and watch a short cutscene from a cinematic angle. This creates a disconnect between the player and the action which is exactly what you do not want. It's also poorly balanced because when two enemies attacks at once it should be bad for you, not give you two free kills.
3. Uneconomical control scheme. Combat is all about being in the moment. For this to work all gadgets and weapons need to be at your fingertips. A quickfire system of some kind if therefor despereately needed.
4. Lack on moves. There are simply too few interesting options in combat, so there is never really a need to prioritize
5. Lack of enemy archetypes. The archetypes there is are not exactly fun to fight. For example the fact that many techniques don't work vs Jaegers, but disarming does, don't make them more interesting to fight. In fact it makes them more repetetive.
6. Targetting issues. For example when you break defense your next attack is sometimes targeted at another enemy, which is almost never what you want.
7. Clunky input, the meat shield in AC3 was not as smooth as it should have been (fixed in AC4). Sometimes no icon appears above enemies heads and you can't block the attack (also some kind of bug I assume).

Overall this leads to a system that is shallow, unengaging, clumsy and just pretty much rubbish. Now I do think they could start with some of the basic ideas of AC3 and then expand on them:

1. Taking out even standard guards requires at least two steps. You may need to injure/disable them first in some way before you can kill them.
2. One way to make the dual counters more interactive would be that when you are attacked you need to tap counter followed by one facebutton/enemy attacking you. You need to choose the right attacks based on archetypes (your attacks will be dealt in enemy rank order). No cinematic camera please!
3. Quickfire of all gadgets (including smoke bombs) needs to be implemented.
4. Tons of options here obviously. A repositioning move, one more defensive move, target a limb move, kick etc.
5. The harder enemies should also require multiple steps to allow for a greater variety of strategies. Just turning off all but one standard move is a very dull design and doesn't make them harder.
6. Playtesting like mad I guess.
7. I feel like they'll be able to iron things like these out if they keep building on the same system for a while.

[luckyto]

Fatal-Feit ... Absolutely. AC3, not ACIV ... which somehow managed to be screwed up. *cough* AI *cough*

--------

It does make you fight, and no need to run, that is not what an assassin should do.

I'm at wild opposition to those sentiments, and they have been expressed on these boards a million times - so don't think I'm picking on you.

I want to fight. I want to be able to fight a hundred guards. I just want it to be fun and rewarding. The franchise has always been about: combat, stealth and free-running. But combat is core. And the player chooses which to do. This idea that I should be forced to run because "that's what an Assassin should do" may be realistic, but it isn't fun. It isn't the game that I want to play, nor many other gamers or people who've been with the franchise.

-----------

SushiGlutton --- going down your first list

1) Standard guards can go down in one-hit. All games need cannon fodder. Cannon Fodder is fun. They are the warm-up. The salad before the main meal. I don't see this as an issue.
2) The "watch instead of do" philosophy. Oh my... A lot of points here ...

... but first, I have never understood the radical urge to go back to platforming where I have to hit a button for every action. When I hear such criticism, people usually make it out as if there is no player input to free-running as set forth in AC1 --- and that is simply not the case. The player's job is to navigate. Navigating the rooftops and the crowds should be the focus of the player's involvement --- and not when to hit jump or vault like Super Mario Brothers. When you actually run in real life, you aren't thinking "this leg, now this leg, now that leg, now jump." Your reflexes do all that for you. Just like High Profile does all that for the game character. Your mind and eyes are focused on where you are going and the best path to take, and that's why the Parkour system in AC is perfect --- because we shouldn't be thinking about the character actions, we should be thinking about where is the best place to get away, what is the best approach, or is that a guard up ahead.

Second, for combat, I would love to go back to the "watch and react." Since ACII, we've had this combat system that is all about archetypes. For this guard, hit this button combo. For that guard, hit this button combo. It's a brainless IF THIS, DO THIS system. ACIII "almost" broke that stereotype. I could - at the very least - shake things up a little. I would much rather be countering, dodging, grabbing and attacking based on what the enemies were doing, my position in the battle and such ... just like AC1. Reaction. A "watch and react" is the ideal combat system if the AI is decent. A do system is often --- for this enemy, do this, for that enemy do that. And that get's old very quickly (AC2, ACB, ACR).

Third, Action-Cam camera kills have been part of the franchise since part one. I personally do not agree that they take the player out of it -- nor do they create a disconnect. It's a fun reward for solid play. They can be overdone --- and have been overdone. If used poorly, they can create a disconnect. But they certainly can be done right; and numerous games have implemented similar mechanics with great success. I personally was happy to see the double-counter kill cam --- it hearkened back to ACI.

For 3, 4, and 7: AC1 did all those well. You had limited weapons, but you could access them quickly. Knives were easy throw in the mix, and you could mix up light attacks, heavy attacks, grabs, dodges and counters in any number of ways. Add AC3's layer where you have additional options for grabs, kicks, attacks and ranged after counters and you would have a very deep system. (< Evolution)

It's not so much about the quantity, it's about depth The moves in AC3 and AC1 are PLENTY. It's the ability to mix them up and combine them in unique ways. And that's where AC really falls short.... because of the archetype system. It's the archetype system that forces you into only a few useful combinations. If you could literally chain any combination against any foe --- that's depth. That's how Batman works. That's how God of War works. That's how AC1 works. And all the great melee combat systems ever.

5: Get rid of archetypes altogether. And make levels of difficulty ... more like AC1.

6. Definitely. It became a major issue in ACIV.

[Dome500]

1) Standard guards can go down in one-hit. All games need cannon fodder. Cannon Fodder is fun. They are the warm-up. The salad before the main meal. I don't see this as an issue.

Huge issue for me. I don't want cannon fodder. If you let me kill hundreds of guards, at least make it more challenging than a 1-hit-kill.

... but first, I have never understood the radical urge to go back to platforming where I have to hit a button for every action. When I hear such criticism, people usually make it out as if there is no player input to free-running as set forth in AC1 --- and that is simply not the case. The player's job is to navigate. Navigating the rooftops and the crowds should be the focus of the player's involvement --- and not when to hit jump or vault like Super Mario Brothers. When you actually run in real life, you aren't thinking "this leg, now this leg, now that leg, now jump." Your reflexes do all that for you. Just like High Profile does all that for the game character. Your mind and eyes are focused on where you are going and the best path to take, and that's why the Parkour system in AC is perfect --- because we shouldn't be thinking about the character actions, we should be thinking about where is the best place to get away, what is the best approach, or is that a guard up ahead.

Not really....

1. You seem to be pretty lazy...
2. If you ever did parkour you would know that you have indeed to feel and conciously make every move, "your instincts doing this for you" is nonsense. Seriously, try it in real life. You will fail.
3. As if navigation and tactics was SOOOO hard.... Seriously, in games like Splinter Cell Chaos Theory or Conviction you have to do the same thing. But I still have to press when I want to climb up something or jump. What the hell is so hard about this?
4. More interactivity (IMO) = more immersion. The less the game requires me to do the less I feel like doing it. Sure, one can exaggerate it. But to be honest, AC is oversimplifying it

Second, for combat, I would love to go back to the "watch and react." Since ACII, we've had this combat system that is all about archetypes. For this guard, hit this button combo. For that guard, hit this button combo. It's a brainless IF THIS, DO THIS system. ACIII "almost" broke that stereotype. I could - at the very least - shake things up a little. I would much rather be countering, dodging, grabbing and attacking based on what the enemies were doing, my position in the battle and such ... just like AC1. Reaction. A "watch and react" is the ideal combat system if the AI is decent. A do system is often --- for this enemy, do this, for that enemy do that. And that get's old very quickly (AC2, ACB, ACR).

Agreed on this.

Less archetypes but more reactive actions based on what the enemy is doing at the moment. Agreed.
But one has to mention that even AC1 had Archetypes. So a combat system completely without archetypes is not possible.
But I think they should make the archetypes weak to multiple forms of attack and only immune towards one special strategy.
Everything else would be based on what the enemy is doing.
You need to find a balance between "watch and react" and "strike and defend" which enables the game to play fluid without being to easy and not challenging enough

Third, Action-Cam camera kills have been part of the franchise since part one. I personally do not agree that they take the player out of it -- nor do they create a disconnect. It's a fun reward for solid play. They can be overdone --- and have been overdone. If used poorly, they can create a disconnect. But they certainly can be done right; and numerous games have implemented similar mechanics with great success. I personally was happy to see the double-counter kill cam --- it hearkened back to ACI.

Agreed.

A possibility to make this better is if 2 enemies attack to let the player press 2 buttons in shortly after another. If he doesn't he will be able to defend against one enemy but get hurt by the other one. No enemy will die in that case. Something like that or something similar.

For 3, 4, and 7: AC1 did all those well. You had limited weapons, but you could access them quickly. Knives were easy throw in the mix, and you could mix up light attacks, heavy attacks, grabs, dodges and counters in any number of ways. Add AC3's layer where you have additional options for grabs, kicks, attacks and ranged after counters and you would have a very deep system. (< Evolution)

Agreed. AC1 and 2 had the best gadget quick access, and they also had grabs, counters and dodges. I think that all would make for sophistication combined with some good elements from the AC3 combat.

[xx-pyro]

It does need tweaking, counter windows lowered and AI smartened up (things like detection meters should be much smaller aka easier for you to be spotted, if they see a dead guard they automatically stay on high watch, etc).

After all these year I literally still see no reason to add a crouch button, it doesn't add anything useful to the game considering we automatically hide behind crates and stuff like that (don't we? I haven't played in awhile. If not we should, which would still mean no need for a crouch button).

More archetypes requiring different strategies is always a simple way to beef up combat a bit, although that sort of depends on the time period as well. I thought AC3s was fine besides a few bugs/glitches.

One thing AC4 did perfect was not having any long-range insta kill weapon ala xbow/regular bow. Sleep darts and berserk darts were OP enough as was but at least they didn't just kill the guards outright.

[rcole_sooner]

More content .... better graphics ... less worry about revamping combat.

[xx-pyro]

More content .... better graphics ... less worry about revamping combat.

Yes graphics are much more important than an integral part of gameplay like combat is

[rcole_sooner]

I am glad you agree.

[xx-pyro]

I am glad you agree.

Someone who counters snark with more snark, I think I like you.

[rcole_sooner]

Cool. It's all fun.


...but really I am the type that just wanders around looking at the scenery. LOL! This is also why I do a lot of PC titles, so I can crank up the graphics.

That is why I am more of a sp campaign type, than an mp type. I like to go slow and take it all in.