Combat Style needs to go

[Phostan]

Because the only people who thrive in the world of combat style are people who are excellent at making scripts in CMUD/ZMUD/Mudlet/etc to manage combat style automatically. The rest of us just suffer in mediocrity or make mages.

[Davairus]

What if you could type a command (or, situationally, use a skill) to shift into a different style, i.e. type "style def/off/bal". So that means there'd be no requirement to change weapons, instead try to fight defensively with a claymore if you want to. Naturally, different weapon combinations would work better with different styles, so the optimal thing would be to still do that, but this provides a fallback plan for those times where you end up getting dirt kicked for 5 rounds or whatever. there could be a new auto to change style when you change weapon but that also lags you for changing it (but not if you didnt change it). The mind games of fighting while dual wielding in a defensive style, able to barrage out of it immediately into offensive and swiftly hobble afterward might also generate interesting tension, as opposed to (as you pointed out) just macro'ing that. Going full offensive with a polearm as a pally might be fun to play too. Maybe a bard could "taunt" somebody into fighting in offensive style against their will, maybe berserk woudl mean being offensive since the character became angry. BTW, I'm not suggesting that's the solution, its just a "what if" that supplements the current system without removing it.

[Scrynor]

So I'm a heavy scripter (who also sucks at pvp). I've also tried to help multiple people level the playing field on the combat triangles.

There are three main differences between all the stuff I do in CMUD and a newbie with aliases.

1) Variables
2) Auto knowledge of inferiority / superiority via MDSP
2) Awareness

Running both triangles takes a ton of variables and logic to juggle well. You can get close-ish with aliases if you do a bunch of them. But then you have to remember a lot of alias commands and you need to fix them every time you get a new weapon. And a new player needs to know to do this and have the skills to keep it up and put up with that maintenance burden. Then the player has to read his prompt or watch the opponent weapons to command the right alias. In CMUD, I don't have to do that. MDSP tells me I'm inferior as long as I can see. So I can have a script "ad" to just switch me from inferior style to superior.

I think you could level the playing field a massive amount with the following steps (which may be super hard to code, I don't know).


Add 4 new equipment slots (named however).
Back loop, main belt loop, off hand belt loop, shield loop.
These slots can only hold weapons. Back loop only 2 hander, belt loops only 1 handers.

Add commands switch styles based on what you have in the loops. Make it smart enough to handle things like counterbalance.
Offenseive
Defensive
Two-handed

Add a command to automatically switch to automatically switch to advange.

Now you can easily run the style triangle. You can easily switch which weapons you are using to do it. If you want to try the type triangle too you research what your opponent fights with and change the weapons in your slots accordingly. If you get disarmed and sacced you can throw a new weapon in that slot.

Add more instruction on this system and how to do aliases to the mud school.

You could also build off any of this as devs see fit. I do like Dav's idea of adding more interaction with skills messing with opponents ability to run the triangles. Or you could let the swap commands work with a 1 round lag or something.

Those are just my thoughts on how to streamline this without needing scripting knowledge if you leave it as is.


As for whether to get rid of it...
I think the core problem is this user story:
I read the help file on my new ability uncanny attack
It told me to switch into weapon type advantage and use my ability
I did that and immediately got ruined

The triangles are coupled into too many things IMO.
It's tied into defenses for the auto-damage exchange and the usage of skills. It should only be tied into one of those two things. Not both.
I find a gate to skills more interesting (if investing in the refinement of these skills). But a modifier on auto-damage is fine too.
But both makes a very complex and knowledge dependent trade space that is both hard for players to understand and hard for devs to balance.

[Scrynor]

Meant to say
"Or you could let the swap commands work with a 1 round lag while blind or something." Not just lag (bc then scripting would still be superior).

[Xenyar]

Never made or used a script. Macros is all I use mixed with old fashioned typing it out.

[Scrynor]

I'm using the term script in a general sense not an exact program specific definition. The vast majority of what I do are macros too. Far stronger than an alias but far less than automation.

[Ashlyn]

I voted yes but with the disclaimer that the classes I lean heavily into playing get completely hosed by combat style. I kind of like Dav's idea of paper, rock, scissors. I also think the current system can be salvaged if weapon swapping in combat gave you a 1.5 round lag instead of just a brief cooldown period.

[Xenyar]

I'm sure I can come up with other reasons why to keep it, but here's one off the top of my head. Two handed against dual wield. If there is only weapon advantage in play, then why would you go down a defense and damage by using only one weapon? There has to be an advantage of going two hander over dual wield. If not, then when exactly is there an advantageous time to go with a two-hander?

[Stiehl26]

The only people, with the exception of xenywr it seems, who want the style (rock paper scissors) or those scripting to auto change to a different weapon or style. Combat style was one of the worst things implemented. Over half of the player base play mage types so they don’t have to deal with it. That should tell you something. A mechanic discluding people from playing a class they may have otherwise enjoyed.

[Kalist19]

I don’t script or use triggers at all for weapon swaps.

On hardulf/hirendan/Skeggi/aelaldric I used macros or aliases. F6 defensive style F7 dual wield F8 two handed. Super easy to swap fast.

On Xhao I used aliases for monk stances. tt = tiger, cc = crane, etc

On heinrildt I just cursed a two handed spear and said YOLO

If you don’t want to worry about the combat stuff you could always make a mage with weapon ward or something.

[Xenyar]

What are the reasons people want to get rid of combat styles? All I see is "I think the people winning are using scripts for weapon swaps".
First I don't think there's many, if any, that use scripts for that.(I could be naive) And two, scripts don't equal wins.

[BlackWidow]

So you're saying we should buff rogues or remove counterbalance because combat style concentration matters a LOT for dealing with that. And you're saying rangers don't deserve to have double disarm to create an opening for their bow moves. Is that what I'm hearing from this not well thought out idea?

[Davairus]

First of all a disclaimer that I was already drinking for an hour before I opened this thread again, and I may not be thinking as clearly as I usually do, BUT, Xenyar, I think the concern was that combat style management + weapon style management at the same time is overwhelming. Whereas, if all that defensive style meant was 12% less damage taken/dealt for defensive, and similarily 6% more damage taken/dealt for offensive, these two players would deal the exact same damage to each other. whether in the same style or opposite. it'd just be balanced, and from there it would come down to what you preferred (a big dick fight or a longer grinding one), and then you throw in weapon advantages and whether you could get the hobble off for a dodge/AC Penalty (assuming that stayed on combat style matchup)

Then for the two-handed vs dual wield part of that entire system, we shouldn't have anything capable of outdamaging dual wield on a defenseless combat dummy, but the two handed weapons should obviously have better parry chance against dual wielded weapons, after you gave up a whole defense for them, and as far as I know we do already have that parry bonus and also a damroll bonus. So its nice, but we could check whether maybe dual wield needs a hitroll penalty to be correctly balanced against the two handed damroll bonus actually.

[Kalist19]

I pretty much ignore weapon style matchup if I'm playing warrior/berserker/ranger. Combat style is waaaaay more important.

If I know the other guy is going to likely use a specific weapon type (like if I know they are going to use a spear to try to prevent my dodge) then I will set up my macros so I'm using something either equal or advantageous to what I 'think' they will be using, but I don't sweat it if I'm wrong. If we have been skirmishing and I know what weapons they have then all adjust but again, I won't really sweat it if I'm weapon matchup inferior if I'm able to keep combat style superiority.

[Olyn]

Some thoughts and opinions as a long-time player and developer:

The idea of combat style as a game of rock/paper/scissors impacting melee combat feels good. Breaking out a big ass maul to overhead crush an enemy without a shield or weapon big enough to block it feels good. The same is true of pressing an advantage by barraging the shield of an opponent who is already on the defensive. I don't think gutting/cutting the mechanic that feels this good is the right move.

With that said, I can't help but notice that the scenarios I just mentioned are ways the player is actively pressing an advantage. We should probably audit all the ways that combat style affects things before we consider any serious changes, but I think that change might be warranted for some hidden/passive aspects of this. Say, hypothetically, that combat style advantage gives you a +10% chance to land one of your attacks (it doesn't, I just picked an arbitrary thing as a theoretical example). It may be better to have this chance start at 1 or 2% and increase for each round the advantage is continuously maintained up to the maximum. This makes it less punishing for guessing incorrectly while skirmishing or being a bit slower than an opponent, but still hurts you if try to just ignore the mechanic. This maintains the feel of the mechanic with active skills and somewhat minimizes it on the passive end.

Hobble skill exacerbates any perceived problems with combat style by punishing the combat style "loser" even more. We have some updates for the hobble skill already on the docket for this next patch.

Having both combat style and weapon matchup to worry about does increase the complexity. It might be too much but, then again, maybe it isn't. If we were going to phase out one or the other, I'd lean towards trivializing the weapon matchup.

Our whole system of vuln weapons and bows in general complicate things.

I don't think our top PKers use triggers/scripts for switching weapons. At most, they are using macros or aliases and everybody has access to these, even on the webclient. There's too many nuances to just have a script make the decision for you. I would guess that players that try to script this are actually losing fights if they try to rely on it. A flat 1 round or 1.5 round lag on any active weapon switch in combat (already suggested) evens the field here by providing the opponent a chance to flee and get their shit together if their opponent is over-relying on switching weapons to win.

[Xenyar]

Interesting suggestions for tweaking things on the passive end while keeping the combat system, Olyn. That might be something to dig into more.

Kalist is 100% correct with figuring out your opponents weapon selection in the first skirmish or two. Once you learn that you adjust your macros to manage swaps more effectively.

[Phostan]

Dav's suggestion of it just being something you toggle between with various degrees of buffs and debuffs depending on style, seems infinitely better than keeping it.
[quote]So you're saying we should buff rogues or remove counterbalance because combat style concentration matters a LOT for dealing with that. And you're saying rangers don't deserve to have double disarm to create an opening for their bow moves. Is that what I'm hearing from this not well thought out idea?[/quote]
Rangers suck and need something better than double disarm, but that's discussion for a different topic thread imo.
Thieves pk capabilities are mid, and honestly, any change regarding combat style would only serve to benefit them long-term.

[Stiehl26]

Olyn, there was some player (mummy maybe) who was running near perfect pk records with scripting.

[Olyn]

Stiehl, I know I've been semi-afk for almost 2 years now, but I don't think I slept through that. I would need to see the receipts to believe it.

[Davairus]

Oh, I wasn't suggesting at all remove it. I was just saying, I did't see there'd be a huge problem with choosing to manually enter a style. I think when someone is the Forsaken of Legion and has equipped the blood-filled voulge, the killing intent is cartoonishly obvious there. That character is on a homicidal rampage, and it makes sense for them to just go on full offense. You'd expect wild blows that are heavy enough to actually pummel a defensive style opponent. How that would work mechanically would just be some sort of Legion cabal power (demon form?) that increases the offense style damage dealt I had suggested by another 6%. We can keep things nice and easy!