Originally posted by toms
This shouldn't be too hard to do, as they alreas have hit zones defined from SOF

Actually, the model hitboxes were reduced down to one solid hitbox, if I read Fallen's reply correctly in another thread.

So they would need to redefine hitboxes, but then also release the tools to compensate for all the custom models.

An interesting thing they do in the GBA game New Droid Army - when you get hit, you take 'current' health damage, then you take 'total' health damage. When they both hit zero, you die. Before that, you can get to a level where your max possible health is 15 or whatever. Can't see it happening, but it is an interesting thought. I also think 1-touch death is a bit extreme for a saber - especially 'blue'. Like Dooku does to ObiWan in AOTC, small sharp moves should do damage but not death.

I'll go on record as saying I have no clue whatsoever about balancing all of the regular moves, stances, comboes, and special moves in ANY of the gameplay modes. So whatever Raven comes up with, while it will not be 100% balanced (since I don't think that is either objectively measureable or possible), it will be much better than whatever I could do.

Mike

Originally posted by Prime
Sigh. It sounds so easy when you say it. Software development, unfortunately, is a cruel mistress :) It isn't as easy as it sounds. Granted, there are some things in 1.02 that shouldn't have slipped out the door.

Well, that I do realize, but that should be the goal regardless. :) I do accept that NO product out the door is EVER 100% perfect, but there are some aspects of 1.02 that, as you said, should NEVER have been released. It's just a question of QA testing, I think, but doing so on a wider scale than within your own company. A public beta release is a good way, or a public demo before releasing the game.

The only thing I worry about is having multiple unique learning curves for the different gametypes. I can see this pissing people off (especially casual players) if they have to learn multiple fighting styles. Certainly, damage ranges might have to be different, but having different moves or something might introduce more problems than it solves.

True, that could be an issue, but then people would just do what they do right now anyway: pick the mode they like and play it pretty much exclusively. There wouldn't have to be tons of difference between the modes, and some modes will obviously HAVE to be different (IE: class-based vs. FFA), but there can be subtle differences from mode to mode. IE: in FFA, picking up any weapon, you move at a constant speed. In Class-Based, if you're playing as the heavy weapons guy, you move 20% slower, but your weapon does 20% more damage than in FFA. Stuff like that (though not necessarily that specific change). I think that the moves themselves should all be basically the same, with maybe additional moves/powers, etc. thrown in, but the basics still remaining the same.

If you go this route and you have blue stance be a one hit kill, then you've removed any reason to use yellow or red. Right now red is more or less a one hit kill, but the slow swing is a disadvantage. If blue was a one hit kill, you have a quick swing that is still deadly. Which will I pick? Not red or yellow.

That'd be true if the only difference in the stances were speed and damage. I'd make the stances/styles have different effective ranges, different defensive abilities, and different abilities to penetrate an enemy's defenses. So, while the damage would be uniform if you connect, how you go about connecting differs from stance to stance. IE: red stance has a longer range because it's a wider, more aggressive swing. But it's slower. It can penetrate defenses the best, but it has the weakest self-defense rating. So on the plus side you've got longest range, most penetration power, but slowest speed and weakest self-defense. Blue stance could be the fastest stance, and the best self-defense, but the shortest range and the weakest penetration abilities. Yellow would be a jack of all trades, but a master of none; medium range, medium power, medium speed, etc.

Now, you personally might pick a particular style, but if the stances were done properly, that'd just be what you're comfortable with, and not the hands-down best stance period.

[b]What uber moves are you refering too? DFA? It has it's disadvantages, like leaving yourself open for quite a while. Personally, I like the special moves. I think it adds variety. I'm not sure how removing special moves would increase the need for "skill". Maybe I'm missing what you are saying./b]

Yeah, the DFA, especially in 1.02. The backstab in 1.03, the blue lunge, the yellow DFA move, etc. Those kinds of moves. I'd have no problem leaving them in, but if they ARE in, they should operate the way the DFA did in all patches after 1.03. Keep in mind that the DFA in 1.02 (due to the bugs) meant that it had very little by way of disadvantages. Same goes for the backstab in 1.03. Your chances of scoring an instant kill were very high, and yet you were hardly open to attack at all and could repeat the moves rapidly. DFA post-1.03 was well balanced. It was an incredibly powerful, nearly unblockable move that had a HUGE downside in that it left you frozen for about 2 seconds or so if you missed. As such, it was mostly useful as a flashy finishing move. In that sense, I have no problem with uber moves. People hardly ever spammed DFA post-1.03. The problem I have with uber moves, or moves that have a very high damage/penetration/whatever advantage to them is that people will use those moves over and over ad nauseum and never bother using other moves. This makes fighting them INTENSELY boring.

While it was ridiculed at the time (partially by me, admittedly), ArtifeX's public "I'm leaving" post was a good illustration of what I thought the effect of uber moves was: it reduces the game to a quickdraw event of who can execute the killer move first. Your game becomes a one-trick pony, basically and I REALLY worry about that. I think if you put it in, they will use it. If there's one move in your arsenal that is unblockable, or that has far and away more damage potential than any other move, people will spam it because it's just easier to do that than to whittle away at someone.

So let's say Raven includes some special move like the DFA or the lunge or the backstab, and it is a guaranteed hit (which means a guaranteed kill with my damage system) assuming you're close enough to use it. Unless that move has MAJOR downsides to it, people will spam it. I guarantee it. Maybe they won't spam it the way the ass fighters did, by running backwards, but one way or another, they'll spam it. Maybe it'll be the same combo every time. IE: push/pull, then run up close, turn around, and hit the move. Or push/pull, then kick, then the move. It will basically always be the default move for people and that will get very old very fast.

However, if people are actually required to learn to use the sabre with more than one move, if they're required to learn particular combos, or which stance is most effective in a given situation, that will inject an amount of skill and strategy into the game beyond who can jump into the crowd and pull the uber-move first. That's why I'm against uber-moves. They dumb the game down because there's no reason for people to bother learning the other moves. Why bother learning the intricacies of sabre combat when you can just use a particular combo and score instant kills most of the time with little or no consequence?

That's not to say that the uber-moves were unbeatable. The DFA and the backstab in their uber configurations were entirely beatable, but it took a long time in some cases, and it was REALLY boring to fight a guy who'd just use the moves ad nauseum. Usually it'd involve wearing the guy down slowly over time, while trying to stay out of range or dodge them when the uber move was being used. For me it often involved kicking them repeatedly, which was somewhat satisfying but still got boring.

On the other hand, if people actually had to take some time to learn the game, if fights involved more than, say, one move per stance, I think the game would become much more interesting to play. I'm not saying make the learning curve the north face of Everest. I'm just saying make it take more than, "D00d! Just do this one move and you'll be h3114 1337!!!" :)

Originally posted by Solo4114
...DFA in 1.02 (due to the bugs) meant that it had very little by way of disadvantages. Same goes for the backstab in 1.03. ... DFA post-1.03 was well balanced. It was an incredibly powerful, nearly unblockable move that had a HUGE downside in that it left you frozen for about 2 seconds or so if you missed. As such, it was mostly useful as a flashy finishing move...

I see now - you're differentiating 'special finishing' moves from 'special uber' moves. The first being what Raven intended, and eventually got to, the latter being exemplified by the DFA in 1.02 and pivoting backstab in 1.03.

That makes sense to me. Let's face it - you will always see 'one trick ponies' in games, sometimes effective, sometimes frag-fodder. But specials should always have a + as well as a - ... same goes for stances.

Mike

Originally posted by txa1265
[B]
That makes sense to me. Let's face it - you will always see 'one trick ponies' in games, sometimes effective, sometimes frag-fodder. But specials should always have a + as well as a - ... same goes for stances./B] Indeed. I'd hate for them to throw out the concepts of special moves and stances altogether just because of some implementation problems last time. No doubt they have learned from their mistakes.

the issue itself is not the special moves... it's the effectiveness of the normal ones.

Let's say just for the sake of argument that using normal moves your kill average is of about 3 to 4 hits for the kill... while a super move would finish it in 1. This would be ok.

What's not so ok is that although the super move can kill in one hit.. the normal moves sometimes dont kill at all... saber defense is far too effective that a flag runner can run all the way from blue to red base with me glued to his @ss swinging left and right and it simply wont score a hit.

If normal moves are effective and balance with defense... i think it would be ok to have super moves that kill in one hit. To be honest.. yes i also think it adds flavor.

The bottom line is anyone can play as they wish... if one guy wants DFA all the way fine... as long as some other guy who doesnt like to spam moves has at least a good chance of killing another without even using one super move.

Cheers.

Certainly a good point. I don't play CTF, so I can't comment on how well the saber works there. I'm all for upping the damage, but I would have red as a 1 or two hit kill, yellow 2 hits, and blue 3 hits, or something like that. Just enough difference to have each stance be unique in terms of what it can do.

I've played on a few servers where the damage scale was increased, and I found this to be quite effective for increasing the usefulness of the saber.

Yeah, it's not so much flashy special moves that I object to, it's UNBALANCED flashy special moves. :)

Now, before Spider Al jumps in here (or rather, Kynes -- nice Dune reference, by the way), I think there are somewhat different balance concerns for sabre combat than there are for firearm combat.

As has been discussed, for the most part, the guns are relatively well balanced already. By that, I mean that there is no single gun that can do all jobs, all the time. You can't snipe with the heavy explosive weapons, you can't ricochet shots around corners with energy weapons, and you don't get area damage with sniping or other weapons. Some guns are more useful than others, but you still need to use a variety or become VERY good with a select few if you want to be able to use them in ANY situation. That or you pick your battles (IE: never get in close, 'cause you're no good with a Heavy Repeater, or ALWAYS get in close, 'cause you don't like the sniper rifle -- you get the point).

With sabre combat, I think balance becomes a much more finely tuned experience. You need to have the overall stances be more or less even in terms of pros and cons, or else, why bother having stances at all? Now, as initially INTENDED, this balance was present, if you disregard the special moves for the stances. Blue was fast and good for defense, but weak on offense. Red was slow and good for offense, but weak on defense. Yellow was right in the middle. The individual swings and combos may have been somewhat differently powered, so that certain combos were always more effective than others, but the stances were overall pretty evenly matched. Sure, you could use red stance all the time, but someone who could use ALL the stances in a variety of situations would be the superior player. At least, that's how it was supposed to be, I think.

Now, what ACTUALLY happened was that through the different iterations of the game, certain stances became more useful than others. In 1.02, red stance was the stance of choice. Why? Because there was no blocking, or at least almost no blocking. Why bother using a stance that is fast, but weak, when its major benefit, namely its defensive abilities, are basically absent from the game? Yellow was a decent stance, but given that all you had to do was stay out of range and tag someone three times with your red stance swings, why bother with anything else? After 1.03/1.04, there were no stances that were ALWAYS superior, so you'd think balance would've been reclaimed in terms of sabre combat. Well, it was, but only if you could actually HIT the guy. And even then, you'd still have to wail on him for a while since the sabres took a while to kill. Minimum of three hits.

Enter the special killer move. DFA in 1.02, backstab in 1.03. There really wasn't TOO much in 1.04 that'd do it, although blue lunge was pretty good and yellow DFA combined with kicking/push could be quite useful. The MAJOR advantage of the special moves was, as BloodRiot accurately pointed out, their speed in killing and ability to penetrate defenses. Simply put, people get bored dealing out nicks and minor cuts with a laser sword. They want the satisfaction of a good clean hit meaning a kill.

That's why I suggest that all hits be instant or two-hit kills. You could still have effective blocking, but if you made it through the defenses, BANG. Dead. No muss, no fuss, no beating on the guy as if you're wielding a whiffle bat (and I'm talking about the big red one, not the yellow ones -- the yellow ones could actually hurt).

The special moves, I'd have no problem with, as long as their advantages were evenly weighted against their disadvantages. The DFA from 1.03 on and the backstab in 1.04 were pretty much perfectly balanced. They would basically cut through any defenses, but they froze you in place and had a slow recovery time. Plus, they required you to place yourself in a vulnerable position (hunched over, with sabre buried in ground, or with your back to the enemy). If the special moves in JA are balanced like this, I'm all for 'em. One trick ponies will always be around, but eventually they'll either leave the game out of boredom/frustration, or they'll learn to use more moves. Either way, the fighting will be better.

Special moves as finishing moves are great. They add flare and can look incredibly cool. The blue backstab and yellow DFA were some of my favorite looking moves in the game. Plus, when you pull 'em off, they're the ultimate "Who's the man?" statement. Not only did you beat the other guy, you beat him and looked good in the process. :)

BUT...

If you screw up the special move, time it wrong, or aim incorrectly, you should get your ass handed to you on a platter for your cockiness. In 1.03/1.04, if you could execute a successful red DFA, it looked DAMN cool, and was a sign that you'd really beaten your opponent. But if you missed, or if your opponent got out of the way, you were screwed. That's how a finishing move should be. Not only does it become a point of pride to finish a guy off with such a move, it becomes a point of pride when someone tries to finish YOU off, and you turn the tables on 'em. :)

So yeah, the problem needs fixing from two angles: on the one hand, the sabre has to be a viable weapon even when you're just swinging it around with normal moves. Towards that end, you need to have it be 100% lethal. At the same time, special moves need to be balanced so that, while they confer a huge payoff, they can also incur a huge drawback. Use at your own risk.

Otherwise, we'll have the same boring gameplay we had in JO, with people spamming two or three moves ad nauseum. I still think special moves can work and be a nice addition, I just wouldn't mind if they weren't included. If they are included, just make sure they're balanced accordingly, and things will be fine. I still don't think you NEED them (certainly not the way you did in JO) if you make the sabres 100% lethal, but they could add another nice element to the game.

All the stances are already useful in different situations. Rarely, maybe, but they are nevertheless useful enough to be called "balanced" if that's the term you insist on using. ;)

Otherwise, we'll have the same boring gameplay we had in JO, with people spamming two or three moves ad nauseum.Such people die a swift death... unless you're referring to sabre strikes by themselves. A single strike causes different effects depending on the motion of the player, thus one combination of directions and button-presses can yield infinite combat combos. There's nothing wrong with using red stance overhead repeatedly, for instance.

Well, once 1.04 came out, I found that all the stances really were pretty well balanced, in relation to each other. The problem was, they were ALL pretty useless in terms of the damage they dealt and the level of blocking. Throw in bacta, drain, and heal, and you've got neverending battles against the same opponent. Kinda boring.

So, people naturally used the special moves. They were quick, easy, and if you hit, guaranteed a kill. The proble was, people would just do lunge, lunge, lunge, lunge, lunge, etc. Or they'd just continually backstab or do the DFA or what have you. It got old and boring really. I may not like DM style gameplay that much, but at least with guns the guns, the fights weren't quite as repetitive.

The special moves themselves were great as finishers, and that's where they belong. Fighting a good solid fight, battering your opponents defenses down, then executing a final killing blow with some flourish to boot, that's fun. Fighting guys who do nothing but one move over and over, that's not fun, that's tedious.

And if they did die a quick death, it might not be so bad. Eventually they'd get bored and leave or learn to use different moves. But the problem was, with regular sabre attacks being so weak and blocking being so high, special moves were the only real viable solution to be guaranteed to kill your opponent. Plus, the lunge and yellow DFA had not much by way of downside. The yellow DFA left you stationary, but in the midst of the swing people would still have a tough time hurting you (at least, that's what I remember...it's been a little while). The lunge could be used very quickly and repeatedly. Sure you could dodge it, but they could just dodge when you attacked and start doing the same move again.

I have no problem with people repeating their basic swings. I figure that's part of folks learning. The easiest combo in the game was the yellow 5-slash forward attack. And yes, THOSE people would die quickly (assuming you actually could get through the autoblocking).

But if they want to make the game more exciting, I say make special moves finishing moves, but make the sabre a truly powerful weapon worthy of respect. Make it effective when it connects, regardless of the stance or type of swing. You can still differentiate between the stances, but a hit is a hit is a hit and should be a kill. At the very least, no more than three hits (and by hit #2, you should be down to, like 5 health). Hey, maybe make the special moves actually really WEAK so that you'd ONLY use them when you've worn your opponent down to 5 health or something. Or make one special move like that, one special move the killing blow for when the enemy is knocked down on the ground, and make one special move, maybe, a mid-air attack or something, IE: to counter people kicking or jumping around. Like you can only execute it if you and your opponent are both in mid-air and the opponent is or is not swinging (one or the other). Something like that. That would spice things up.

So, people naturally used the special moves. They were quick, easy, and if you hit, guaranteed a kill. The proble was, people would just do lunge, lunge, lunge, lunge, lunge, etc. Or they'd just continually backstab or do the DFA or what have you. It got old and boring really. I may not like DM style gameplay that much, but at least with guns the guns, the fights weren't quite as repetitive.Perhaps it's just the community circles I move in, but "special" moves are extremely dangerous... for the people who try to use them. One DFA ends a fight in a NF duel, for the person who tried it. A blue lunge gets you kicked in the side of the head more often than not.

The yellow DFA left you stationary, but in the midst of the swing people would still have a tough time hurting you (at least, that's what I remember...it's been a little while). The lunge could be used very quickly and repeatedly. Sure you could dodge it, but they could just dodge when you attacked and start doing the same move again.The yellow pseudo-butterfly move leaves you wide open, in fact it's much worse than the DFA for that. All you do is hit them on the right side of the body. If you use a red overhead strike it can kill them outright, even if they're at full health.

And if they did die a quick death, it might not be so bad. Eventually they'd get bored and leave or learn to use different moves. But the problem was, with regular sabre attacks being so weak and blocking being so high, special moves were the only real viable solution to be guaranteed to kill your opponent. Urrm... Basic Red strikes are the best way to kill an opponent. Special moves are too slow and predictable to be effective, and the blue lunge is weak and linear. Don't get me wrong, all those moves have their place. The DFA is used when you get a knockdown from a kick, instant kill. But at no other time. The blue lunge is useful when your opponent likes a frontal attack and is low on health. Good as a finisher, but nothing else. The yellow,.. Well the yellow is useful when your opponent is on a 33.6k modem and he only bought the game yesterday, pretty much. :D

Well, admittedly, I haven't played this game online or offline in quite some time, and I didn't play 1.04 all that much even after it came out. 1.04 illustrated for me that the game simply couldn't be fixed by changing this or that aspect. Fundamentally, the underlying play style (DM) just wasn't for me and wasn't much fun, so I stopped playing. I maybe played 1.04 for about a month or so, occassionally coming back to try out a new mod or what have you.

But, if what you're saying about red stance is true, then that only serves to illustrate my point. It sounds like, from your experience, red stance was really the only way to go. Special moves, blue stance, and yellow stance were mostly useless and would be resigned to only a few very specific circumstances. To me, that smacks of a bit of imbalance, by my definition of the term, and certainly poor game design. You've basically got one stance that dominates all the time. Granted, everyone can use it, so it's not that big a problem. It does, however, make the game fairly boring.

Why even bother having the other stances if only one stance is really effective most of the time? If the red overhead is basically the best attack and works almost all of the time, why bother including any other moves at all? That's why I think that making the sabres really lethal, and having their only differences being speed, offensive penetration abilities, range, and defensive abilities would make the game more varied and ultimately more fun.

I don't know about the rest of you folks, but I get pretty bored pretty quickly when all I see on servers are people doing the same move over and over, and where the only really effective way to kill the enemy is to use the same move over and over. Then you really WILL be in a situation like what caused ArtifeX to leave (the first time). It's just a question of who fires first at that point. Pretty boring, IMHO.

Originally posted by Prime
Certainly a good point. I don't play CTF, so I can't comment on how well the saber works there. I'm all for upping the damage, but I would have red as a 1 or two hit kill, yellow 2 hits, and blue 3 hits, or something like that. Just enough difference to have each stance be unique in terms of what it can do.

I've played on a few servers where the damage scale was increased, and I found this to be quite effective for increasing the usefulness of the saber.
no this is stupid because all you would have to do is run around with mouse1 held down with blue on, and dont give me this stupid bull**** saying "WELL IF YOU ACTUALLY PLAYED THE GAME YOU WOULD KNOW THIS ISNT POSSIBLE" ive played this game probably less then you starwars nerd but i bet im also 50x better than you at it

Do you intentionally make an ass out of yourself in every thread you post in?

Do you intentionally make an ass out of yourself in every thread you post in?

My guess is: hell yeah!

On the other hand - the Ass would probably hand you Your ass if you ever tried to prove your point by FF dueling him. ;)

Just ignore the troll, Emon. No good ever comes of providing them with attention. That's what they crave. Presumably they're starved for it.

It sounds like, from your experience, red stance was really the only way to go. Special moves, blue stance, and yellow stance were mostly useless and would be resigned to only a few very specific circumstances. To me, that smacks of a bit of imbalance, by my definition of the term, and certainly poor game design.But Solo, there's no such thing as gameplay imbalance. I hardly use the DEMP, that doesn't mean it should be made more powerful, it's just useful in some very specific, admittedly rare circumstances. And if you tried to intentionally make the stances, OR the guns useful in more situations respectively, then you'd fail. There will always be one weapon or stance that's most useful in the most situations and it'll get used the most. It's not poor game design, it's the way all the games (and all the GREAT games) I've ever played have been. Thus I judge that it's both impossible and counter-productive to try to "balance" a game in the way you're describing. It wouldn't make it a better game, it wouldn't make it more fun, it'd just make it more bland and samey.

I'm not saying that they should homogenize the stances. Far from it. And as far as the guns, I'd say leave 'em alone. I'd dump the DEMP (hey! That could be a campaign slogan or something) since I think it's basically 100% useless, and put in a more interesting gun instead maybe, but otherwise leave 'em alone.

The sabre is something different. It seems inconsistent to me to have the weapon itself operate in such a radically different way in relatively similar situations. If I swing the sabre at 1/3 speed, 2/3 speed or full speed, it should still cut cleanly through a limb without any trouble. So having the sabres deal out different damage seems silly to me. That'd be the main thing I'd change.

The rest of it would be to have the different stances do different jobs, the same way the guns do. But, because this is the sabre we're talking about, and is one of the major centerpieces of the game, I think that the sabre should be more useful than it is currently, in all of the stances.

That's not to say the uses should all be the same. Far from it in fact. I don't want the game to be samey at all. That's exactly what I'm trying to avoid: the sense of "Oh, this AGAIN??" I want variety in my gameplay, and that's exactly why I want to have the stances be different, but still useful. Maybe certain situations would occur for a person more often, given their style. IE: someone likes to be constantly on the offense, so they stick with red to give themselves range and power. Or a person prefers to play more defense, so they stick with blue. What I want, though, is that you shouldn't be required to play a particular way given the way the sabre operates.

As it stands, red stance was the only really viable way to use that particular weapon. That's a problem to me. The sabre should be more versatile, hence the stances. I think it's a mistake to think of the sabre as three separate weapons. It's a single weapon with (in JO, at least) three separate stances.

Maybe you happen to play more offense, and that's cool, but the guy who plays defense should still be able to dish out a hit now and then and still kill.

Think of it this way. And I know you hate the newer films, but bear with me here. Obi-Wan has a very different fighting style from Qui-Gon, who has a different style from Dooku, etc., etc., etc. Yet each of them is extremely deadly with the stances they choose. That's what I'm looking for. You can pick your style and operate accordingly, but your style is still viable. With the sabre at least, if we're including three stances, let's make all three useful.

Originally posted by Luc Solar
My guess is: hell yeah!

On the other hand - the Ass would probably hand you Your ass if you ever tried to prove your point by FF dueling him. ;)
who are you :o

Think of it this way. And I know you hate the newer films, but bear with me here. Obi-Wan has a very different fighting style from Qui-Gon, who has a different style from Dooku, etc., etc., etc. Yet each of them is extremely deadly with the stances they choose. That's what I'm looking for. You can pick your style and operate accordingly, but your style is still viable. With the sabre at least, if we're including three stances, let's make all three useful.


i have to agree with solo, the styles should be able to stand against guns and other saber styles on their own, instead of having to switch betweem them. but i fink when LA and RAVEN were developing JO they knew very well that the majority of gamers here only play this game because its a STAR WARS franchise. so IMHO please ppl dont suggest anything about " X should be include in the game because X was in the movie" coz' that'll only encourage them to keep making crapping star war games...

the one thing that really ruins the game for me is the lack of indepth saber combats. its like raven simply build JO to be a FPS, a good prove of that is the collision detection (or the lack of it), the level of detail in the detection would be okay in a FPS, but it just not enough for melee combat. the saber system is so simple it an insult to any one with any fighting game experience under their belt. going throught the SP game with the lightsaber makes you wonder if ur really doing anything when ur killing 20 stormtroopers by simply standing still... most of the saber battle in the SP is won by force powers; run in c a shadowtrooper put on speed run behind him give him the chop rinse and repeat...

and if JO was considered a FPS, it'd be one of those bargain bin specials the day it was released; it nots fast and intense like quake or unreal, and its not precise and tactical like RTCW or counterstrike...

and i haven't even mentioned MP haha

But if they want to make the game more exciting, I say make special moves finishing moves

I disagree, i reckon instead of reducing the special moves to finishing moves, there should be more in JA, coz 1) speacial moves are like "set pieces", they can be balanced easier than the normaly moves and 2) if there's more special moves, it would mean that each move would have to be toned down till they are similar to that of the normal moves. 3) normal moves just plained sucked, they are boring, mostly useless and made dueling looked stupid coz ppl just go round jousting instead of fighting propally. i would like to c each style having 20+ different special moves, now dat would make the game exciting

Lots of long posts here and i've read everyone of them and came to the conclusion : Beta Test or release a demo before the game is released so it acts like being a public beta.
It always works (well usually), People always pick up on things that game designers never thought of.

Patches are a bad way to go. They split up communities, fix some problems but makes more lethal ones sometimes, wastes money which we spent for the game which they could use to put into the next game if they has used a beta.

So i just have my fingers crossed they're going to have a beta test and learn from their previous mistakes.

:)

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by toms
What hit strength could do is affect the amount of "penetration" the saber causes.
- A "light" hit to the left arm might only cause left arm damage (20%) and then stop.
- A "medium" hit might cross into the next area (left arm damage 20% + left torso damage 25% = 45%)
- A "heavy" (red stance, 2 handed) hit might penetrate 3 areas (left arm 20% + left torso 25% + right torso 25% = 70%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Are you refering to damage location detection? Like if I hit your arm, your arm is less useful, and so on? If so, Raven looked at this and rejected this as a part of JO (I can't remember the exact interview, but it was a while ago). The reason cited was that no one really wants to play with a "character" that has damaged arms and legs. It makes it so that the person that gets killed now respawns at full health. The winner, who in all likelyhood received some blows, is now running around with no arm. They felt that this would not be a fun way to play. I have to say I kind of agree with them.

No. Im refering to the fact the saber just clips through everything (walls, players etc...) THis makes it hard to accept that a blue stance attack does far less damage than a red stance attack, when you can clearly see that in both cases the lightsaber passed right through someone and should have cut them in half!

If they actually stopped the saber from going through people, then they could allow red stance ones to go much further into the player before stopping than blue stance swings.

So, a swing that goes all the way through someone might go through their left arm, their left side, their right side and their right arm... with each zone entered causing 25% damage... therefore they would recieve 100% damage and die.

However a blue swing might STOP in the second zome (left side) and so would only cause 1/2 the damage. Not only that but it would LOOK LIKE it caused less damage as the blade wouldn't travel as far through the target.

Originally posted by iron_dF
ive played this game probably less then you starwars nerd but i bet im also 50x better than you at it Probably. What do I care? It's just a video game, and so I don't tie any of my self-esteem to my success or failure at it :rolleyes: Nor to trolls flaming me :)

Originally posted by toms
No. Im refering to the fact the saber just clips through everything (walls, players etc...) THis makes it hard to accept that a blue stance attack does far less damage than a red stance attack, when you can clearly see that in both cases the lightsaber passed right through someone and should have cut them in half!

If they actually stopped the saber from going through people, then they could allow red stance ones to go much further into the player before stopping than blue stance swings.

So, a swing that goes all the way through someone might go through their left arm, their left side, their right side and their right arm... with each zone entered causing 25% damage... therefore they would recieve 100% damage and die.

However a blue swing might STOP in the second zome (left side) and so would only cause 1/2 the damage. Not only that but it would LOOK LIKE it caused less damage as the blade wouldn't travel as far through the target. Ah. Thanks for the clarification. I agree that the animations should be better and what you are proposing would be more convincing :)