This thread is for brainstorming for the actual saber system, not the visual components like the hilts, blades, etc. Those are discussed here. (http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=117038)

I've already called dibs on the saber system so the best ideas will be implimented by me when the SDK comes out for MotF/OJP. Anyone is welcome to help.

I'll clear the floor and let others speak first before I give my opinons/ideas on the system.

I liked the dodge meter from MotF, but it needs to have a slower regen if you're going to put it in JA. It gets frustrating to land the perfect blow 7 times in a row, only for the other guy to dodge.

Well, the dodge regen seen in MotF was all just prototype stuff. I never did get to the balancing point before I hit the engine limitation wall.

OK. What were you trying to do that it wouldn't let you, anyway?

There weren't any free data slots so I could improve the animation system. I had the code writen but just didn't have the ability to quickly transmit them to the clients. Major suck. This has been fixed at my request in JKA.

This has been fixed at my request in JKA.
Swung some of that incredible modder weight around, eh? :D

For the sabers, they need to stay mostly as they are, because if they style of fighting departs seriously from base JKA, people are not going to like it.

Also, the saber locks while fighting. Having locks for under a second each time the blades connect would be awesome (this was stated in previous posts by others).

Are you thinking of working on a dynamic animation system? Like if your saber hits the other guy's saber it would deflect a different way each time depending on the relative positions of both sabers?

Originally posted by Samuel Dravis
Swung some of that incredible modder weight around, eh? :DYeah, I guess. I'm the only one that I know of that complained about it directly so I assume I had a lot to do with it. :)For the sabers, they need to stay mostly as they are, because if they style of fighting departs seriously from base JKA, people are not going to like it.If it's fun and interesting, people will play it. If everyone listened to the vocal minority that acts like the world is ending when you change one thing, we'd still be playing with the same exact gameplay as original Dark Forces.Also, the saber locks while fighting. Having locks for under a second each time the blades connect would be awesome (this was stated in previous posts by others). Yeah, I'm going to shoot for dynamic saber locks...they'd happen freqently but not every collision. Plus, I think the saber locks need to be expanded to something more than just rapid button clicking. Something that takes more skill and strategy.Are you thinking of working on a dynamic animation system? Like if your saber hits the other guy's saber it would deflect a different way each time depending on the relative positions of both sabers?Well, not truely dynamic, that would require a pro team and a complete animation system engine rebuild. My system will be semi-dynamic. I'd still be using the same animations, just with dynamic start points and animation speeds. Combined with some fancy coding, we should be able to do some really cool stuff with teh saber system.

If it's fun and interesting, people will play it.No doubt. Just don't mess the original stances up too much. Additional stances are always good though.
Plus, I think the saber locks need to be expanded to something more than just rapid button clicking. Something that takes more skill and strategy.
Perhaps make the sabers where they can slide up and down. You would have to concentrate on keeping it in the middle, or else.
Yeah, I'm going to shoot for dynamic saber locks...they'd happen freqently but not every collision.
Sorry, I didn't mean on every collision, just some of them.
Well, not truely dynamic, that would require a pro team and a complete animation system engine rebuild.
But, I thought that you were a pro! Who cares how long or how hard it is as long as it looks cool!

If you hadn't guessed, I was just kidding... ;) I know it'll look awesome.

Yeah, I'm going to shoot for dynamic saber locks...they'd happen freqently but not every collision. Plus, I think the saber locks need to be expanded to something more than just rapid button clicking. Something that takes more skill and strategy.

Either way your still stuck with pressng something. I'd recommend you go with a direction pressing scheme. Press up bring the lock up. press down bring the lock down. etc etc.

press your directions in a circle, disarm. All the while the other person is trying for the same. This leads to a visual representation of what your actually doing. which is a bonus.

Let certain combo's lead to different results.
circle is disarm
left,right is parry
other combo's lead to the lock breaks intorduced in JKA.

All the while the other person is trying to both prevent your combo and do his. Sorta like chess.

Yeah, that's basically what I was thinking.

However, from a technical standpoint, there's not much you can do while using dynamic locks, there simply isn't the animations for it.

Well, sure, there's enough animations for the actual saber locks but they wouldn't cover a bunch of possible dynamic saber lock situations. Ones where you'd have to violently move the players around to get into one of the saber lock animation sets.

Maybe we could have it so that there'd be major saber locks and minor saber locks.

The major ones would occur when both players are in positions that could easily blend into one of the saber lock animation sets. These would have a bit of a strategic button combinations to try to get an advantage over your opponent.

The minor ones would occur if the sabers are in too odd of positions, the players aren't the right sizes (yoda/Jawas/etc), etc. These would be like the traditional saber locks where you just mash the buttons. The loser would lose some energy and possibly get knocked into a parry.

Well, we'll have to figure out how far the size varation can go before it totally frags the set saber lock animations.

Not quite had the time to read the thread in full from top to bottom but I gather that you are trying to modify the system to make it more film like and involved more skill than the current system?

If that is the case then a suggestion is that you remove the saber throw with all styles of saber and add the kick from the staff stance instead. But that is if you are going for a film like feel.

Don't know if this qualifies for this thread but if you are looking for stance ideas.....try an inverted saber stance?

In my saber system, secondary fire will be for setting your block direction so kick/saber throw would be useable that way.

I suggest that saber throw be turned into a force power that can be used from the force power menu.

Originally posted by razorace
In my saber system, secondary fire will be for setting your block direction so kick/saber throw would be useable that way.

I suggest that saber throw be turned into a force power that can be used from the force power menu. I don't like this idea. Force throw is already on the force power menu & I don't think you should swap out the block button with another button that's going to be used anyways, I think you should just add a block button. Personally, I don't see what's wrong with the current "if you are not attacking then you are blocking" system.

Well, the problem is that there's no true way to "add new buttons" with the engine code.

Besides, saber throw will be used a lot less often with the changes I'm going to make.

...Why the hell not? You can make console commands, right? A button is just a key bound to a console command, which you add in a MENU file.

console commands don't have the same network priority as actual buttons. There would be lag.

I doubt changing one action to a regular command could possibly lag the game up, even with a lot of players.

there are a ton of +button commands, why not just use one of those?

Originally posted by Marker0077
there are a ton of +button commands, why not just use one of those?

That might work but it would involve finding some open ones.

However, Block would be on secondary fire either way, it makes no sense to have Block (a very often used button) on something other than secondary just to allow crazy old schoolers to have their traditional setup.

I agree, and I'm starting to like the sound of your saber system idea.

Sounds Good so far Razor.

What do you really think about getting rid of the stances and create one fully customizable stance where you buy the moves to create your own personalized style... this for all sabers of course... just like you buy the force points.

Nah, probably not. That would be a lot of hassle and in the new system, the special moves will not have the same significance that they used it. They will probably just be to look cool. :)

Is that all everyone has to say about the saber system?

Styles mostly. I'm debating on working on a Flamboyant style. Like Fencing. I've got a rough stance hammered out for it. where the saber flies off the belt into the already outstretched hand.

I can do a quick replacement job on fast or tavion style before the source comes out so as to get any kinks ironed out. Then I can add a new style when the source is available.

That brings up a good question. How should we handle stances in the new system? I haven't really put much thought....

My feeling is that stances should be mostly the same with some minor tactical differences. This means that the swing speeds will basically be about the same.

Somes example of balancing would be that one handed techniques would have a weaker grip on the blade; Multibladed stances would require more skill points ; etc.

I think we should go with this type of setup. Stances (the idle position in a style) should be a menu branch.

Well, I was referring to the current stances/styles as well. :)

Anyway, adding "stances" would be pretty difficult. You'd have to add a bunch of code and add a transition/return movement from the stance position to each saber position. I don't really see that happening for such a simple effect.

If new saber animations were to be done, I'd fill out some of the currently "missing" animations and/or create fully new styles.

And I don't seen the styles being defined by the *.sab files. I think that's too limiting.

Especially since it sounds like Renegade is going to use the OJP/MotF saber system in MB.


I do hope to take advantage of the saber work done for the OJP yes.

How much of it I will be using depends on where the OJP saber system is going, and how far it is willing to change. i.e. are we going to play it safe and only tweak the current saber system, or are we going to go for it and make a totally new one? I personally prefer the latter idea - and from the sounds of it this is Razor's intention too...

Please note I'm talking about Enhanced here. The Basic distro - of course - will not alter gameplay...

Before I start - BloodRiot - sorry if I don't mention stuff you have sent me in your concept doc. I dont' have it at work with me. But I think my plans here co-exist with your plans fairly well. I will re-look at your doc when I get home and see if I've missed anything...

Anyway - to give you an idea of what I personally am aiming for, here's a quick rundown of my saber-related plans for MB 2...

Firstly, it will have a lot in common with the current MB system. The main points being:

* Block button (in the case of MB, saber throw is replaced by block)
* When pressing the block button, your movement speed is reduced, but your blocking ability is increased...

I am not going to defend my decision to remove saber throw here - I think that's a discussion for a different thread. In the end, you can either have saber throw as the alt-press (replacing throw), or assign a different key. So it's not like having a block button nessesarily forces saber throw out - in principle at least...

Reducing movement speed when block is held makes ALL aspects of the game look and feel more real imo. If you need convincing of this, just play MB...

The other main arguments I hear against a block button are:

"It will make saber combat more lag dependant"
I dont' see this as that valid an argument. Any feature which adds more twitch-skill based gameplay to a game will make the game more lag dependant - that's inevitable.
If you see this as a real problem, then you will undoubedly want to start making guns auto-aim to fight lag too...

"Why do you need a block button anyway? If your not attacking, your blocking..."
If it wasn't for other consequences of pressing the block button (e.g. reduced movement speed), I would be inclined to agree. You can also use the combination of attack and block to perform a new function.
I plan to use it for direction blocking / knockback. I'll explain...

...If you JUST hold the block button down, then your blocking ability is increased, but it is still auto-block. i.e. your character automatically blocks incoming attacks.
...this means newbs can still have a chance to enjoy playing a Jedi without having to learn advanced blocking techniques. Plus, fast, blue attacks will probably have to be auto-blocked. (I think they'll be too fast to manually block)

..However, if you hold both attack AND block down, you then are able to directionally block - and possibly knockback. Whether you knockback depends on whether you hit both buttons at PRESISELY the right moment...

While 'directional' blocking, you can basically move the blocking position of your saber around however you like. And if you move it to the correct place to block the incoming saber, then NO attack will get through - including specials. i.e. it's a VERY strong defence, but depends on your skill in determining where the attack is going to hit you..

If you don't block in the right place, and the incoming saber is on target, then you will DEFIENTLY NOT block. So directional blocking is a risk to be taken by those confident in their skill.

If you hit the attack and block buttons at presisiely the moment the incoming saber hits your saber, you knockback your opponents saber, giving you a free chance to hit back...

That's the basic overview of blocking for MB 2. How attacking moves will be triggered is less certain for me at the moment...

Well, maybe you're right. If the blend time is set correctly, it might look ok.

I will do when I get home from work...
...are you on MSN or ICQ by any chance?

Nope. I'm at work. This is what I do for a living.

At home I'm stuck on a 56k, not worth it when I have a t1 here.

Oh - and btw - I already have the concept of 'short' locks in MB (which sounds like this idea of dynamic locks being proposed...), and they work great imo. For me, they add a lot to the 'realistic' look of saber duels...

keshire,
OK - I'll just e-mail you then.. :)

Originally posted by RenegadeOfPhunk
How much of it I will be using depends on where the OJP saber system is going, and how far it is willing to change. i.e. are we going to play it safe and only tweak the current saber system, or are we going to go for it and make a totally new one? I personally prefer the latter idea - and from the sounds of it this is Razor's intention too...

All the way baby! All the way!

Saber stuff reguarding MB2

Well, I don't really see a point in reducing movement speed while blocking. It would take up valuable button space, could cause balancing issues against gunners, and not be realistic to what we have seen in the movies. In prequel trilogy (and in E2 especially) we've seen that Jedi can deflect blaster bolts fairly while running.

I've been thinking that it might be possible to combo the parrying power up that Bloodriot suggested with a directional block all in the same button. This would be quickly and free up a button combo (so we can use the attack + block for something else). The only issues with doing this is determining the downside of doing the parry and if pressing the block button should auto move the block position to the center.

And I haven't seen the short locks of MB. Don't they just jump into one of the preset saber lock animations?

Well, I don't really see a point in reducing movement speed while blocking. It would take up valuable button space, could cause balancing issues against gunners, and not be realistic to what we have seen in the movies. In prequel trilogy (and in E2 especially) we've seen that Jedi can deflect blaster bolts fairly while running.


I beg to differ.

First of all, please note I did not say you couldn't block when running - I said you have INCREASED blocking when not running.
(In MB, I also have a 'sprinting' button, which allows you to reach near-running speed and still have full block - for temporary periods of time)

Secondly, if you carefully and impartially look at saber combat across all of the trilogies, you will be forced to conceed that 80% - 90% of all seen saber blocking (either against blaster shots or saber attacks) are performed while standing still, walking, or at most a slow jog. Blocking while full-running is RARE. My system still accounts for block-running (as I've made clear above) - but it also gives a reason for slower movement rates -and hence creates more Movie-realistic combat.

In base JKII / JKA, there is NO benefit to slower movement while sabering, and therefore it NEVER happens. Jedi's just constantly run ALL THE TIME. If anyone tries to tell me that that is what happens in the movies - well - put it this way - I'm afraid I can't take you too seriously...

However, if you don't see Movie Realism as an important gameplay factor - I accept and respect that viewpoint. I don't agree, but it is a valid argument at least...

MB is good and all for Movie recreations. But I'd like to see a major saber overhaul. Which is what JKA is made for. I'd like to head in a more competitive saber enviroment with all MB has to offer and some new innovations. With JKA I don't see gunners being nearly as popular as they were in JK2.

Yeap keshire - I see what your saying.

I'll be the first to admit that the current MB saber system is only half finished...

THe slow down when blocking does exactly what I hoped it would do - make saber combat more movie realistic. (Whoever says that simply isn't so, I would challenge you to play MB before stating that with such finality...)
But with the introduction of this direction blocking concept, I hope this will give the MB 2 system an increaed competitiveness which - I'll fully admit - the MB system currently is a bit lacking in atm...


Well, I don't really see a point in reducing movement speed while blocking. It would take up valuable button space...


..huh? I thought you had said earlier that you - too - were planning to have a block button?! My block button would take no more button space than your block button!! lol

Running stuff

I didn't mean to imply that running should be the defualt movement mode. It shouldn't. I just feel that the penalities for running while using the saber while should be more ...err...transparent. Things like major vuneriblities to knockdown moves, Parries, and Force Push/Pull.

Running already carries those penalties. It was stated by Raven. And is definately noticable in single player.

Originally posted by RenegadeOfPhunk
..huh? I thought you had said earlier that you - too - were planning to have a block button?! My block button would take no more button space than your block button!! lol

Your proposal takes up two regularly used buttons: Standard Block and Directional Block.

My proposal involved one regularly used button and a possible parry button for tapping (but I'm thinking we don't need a seperate parry button). With what I'm thinking, we could use attack+secondary for something else, like kicking or special moves.

Running already carries those penalties. It was stated by Raven. And is definately noticable in single player.


I'm not aware of these penalites in standard MP. And even if they are there, they obviously are not strong enough, otherwise jedi's wouldn't constantly run everywhere in MP...


Your proposal takes up two regularly used buttons: Standard Block and Directional Block.


No - my system used one attack button (already present) and one extra block button. Directional blocking is achieved by holding down both attack and block - as I've already stated.

...if we want an extra 'special move' button - well -that's possible, but I'd argue that's not a priority...

It's possible we are talking about button combinations here rather than buttons themselves. If so - ok - I think I see what your saying.
Basically, I'd rather use the attack + block combination specifically for directional block + parry (and keep special moves how they are currently) whereas I think you are saying you want to use the attack + block button for kicks and / or special moves, and achieve parryng another way...

OK - we can discuss these possibilities. ALl I'm saying is that both our systems have the same number of button combinations avalaible. We now need to debate what those combinations actually do...


I didn't mean to imply that running should be the defualt movement mode. It shouldn't...


Well, I'm glad that we seem to agree on that. And the exact penalties for running are debatable. ...but do you also agree that unless the penalties when running have some significance, people won't bother - they'll just stick 'Always Run' to true and leave it at that - like they do at the moment...

Well, i've had the chance of discussing such matters with both renegade and razor.

What I initially sugested to renegade was a duel/powerduel only game mode with high emphasis on realistic saber combat.

In the said system, all sabers have the single saber yellow stance speed, they all do the same ammount of damage (wether being high or low...but imo it should be set to very high).

The introduction of the stamina meter would be the most intersting thing about this as it would affect your performance at all possible levels as it simulates something like if you are tired, you are not as fast or you dont strike as hard as you would otherwise. Walk speed is default and engaging sprint or run will tire you (aka drain stamina).

The combat would have 3 diferent actions: attack, defend/block and parry.

*Attack is pretty much self explanatory... the only real diference is that it should be more controlled. I want to wait for razor's mouse control scheme before i go further into this cuz if his idea works it's the best type of control you can possibly get.

*Defense/Block will replace the saber throw. Defense is no longer automatic so to defend you gotta let go of offense. pretty much like movie battles defense but with an extra... you have to to press the direction the attack is comming from to block that particular area.

*Parry is an alternate to defense/block... you attack the opponent's saber to attempt deflecting the saber for a counterstrike (something defense does not do) or disarm.

The reason for the existance of parry vs defend is that defend grants you no attack bonuses whatsoever. You take a defending pose to regain some stamina and is easier to perfom and with more chances of success. Parry on the other hand acts as a "powerup move"... you press attack+defense, it consumes a bit of stamina as a normal attack and then allows the refered attack bonuses for a coutner attack or disarm... the downside is that if the opponent realizes you are trying to deflect him or disarm him, he can also engage the powerup (again attack+defense) and try to reverse the game... the one with more stamina will usually win.

Saberlocks are also a factor here and may occur during any of the 3 types of actions.

Counterattacks can only be performed as a parry followup. It can be a normal saber attack, a force push, a kick or punch, a hilt bash all determined by the action (pressed key) that follows the sucessful parry. The counterattacked player has a penalty to withstand a counterstrike. If his saber get's deflected, he's stunned for a fraction of a second which is a worthwhile bonus for the attacker as any counter he may chose to inflict has a high possibility of success.

Some parries or blocks or saberlocks may occur if 2 players attack eachother and the sabers happen to connect. however, if both player do attack and the sabers dont connect with each other and both saber hit the other player, both of them may lose and end the round as a tie. Of course there's also the possibility of the sabers not connecting and only on of them hit the opponent...but it's a too high of a risk imo.

The major thing in this system is the stamina or fatigue (whatever you may call it) meter. I've mentioned it before but now i will explain it. The meter will work much like the force meter but will gradually decrese it's maximum value overtime. This is too simulate the combatant's fatigue level... you can't possibly keep fighting for 2 hours at top notch performance. Almost every action you make will tire the player a bit... some actions are more exhausting than others of course. A good use for defense is that it enables you to farily easy block the enemy's attacks while replenishing your stamina. Also some factors will decrese the stamina's max level besides the time spent fighting like getting hit (not fatally of course). So a graze to the arm will decrese the max level of stamina to simulate penalties inflicted by the injury. Fall damage applies as well. As explained... keeping your stamina at high levels will be beneficial so timming and strategy is of the utmost importance. Spamming will definetly get you killed in this system as the opponent is likely to defend or parry and you will be too tired to fight back efficiently. I say it again.. stamina will apply bonuses if high or penalties if low to practically everything on does in this system.

The stances should be dropped and replaced by a style editor much like the skin editor menu or the force powers menu... you have a selection of moves that cost points. Like force powers, the better the move.. the more it costs. In this system, dual sabers and staves are a definite advantage and therefore should also be bought with points, much like a longer saberblade should cost more points. I see it this way cuz, if staff is indeed a tough art to master like it is said... then you must spend more time with it than you would with single sabers and therefore cannot allocate as much time to force training as a singel saber user would.

Taking up on the discussion above between renegade and razor, i think the defending while running wont directly be at penalty... but if using this system remember that running drains stamina...and that directly affects defending performance.

Well that pretty much explains what my idea on a good saber system should be all about. I hope i didn't confuse you or bore any reader :)

I've initially talked about this with renegadeofphunk and i know for a fact he agrees with me, I've later discussed this with razorace as well and he poitned out a few things that i already took into consideration when i wrote this post.

Well just say what you think of it :)
Cheers.

I'd suggest against move picking. And instead suggest style picking. You have seven to choose from so far.

fast
medium
strong

tavion
desann

dual
staff

plus any that others make. And I'm sure I'll make something. ;)

I'd also like to add stance choosing to the jedi customization menu with at least three stances for each style. As well as saber off/on options.

BloodRiot,

Thx. I knew I was forgetting something important from your proposal -and the stamina bar was it!
Indeed, I think the stamina bar would be a great addition.

One thing I would say is that I don't think we should force walk to be the default during duels. There is already an option for run / walk in the standard options after all...
I just think block should force walk - as it already is in MB and which we know works...

..and I THINK our ideas of what happens when you hit both attack + block are similar - i.e. they perform the parry / knockback move. But I'm not sure what you think about my idea of the parry having to be well-timed for it to work - otherwise it's just a strong defense...

And also - just to clarify one point - if both Jedi have a lot of stamina, and they attack each other at the same time, saber locks will result (long or short) - but if one Jedi has a substantially lower stamina than his opponent - this means the lower Jedi will be parried / knocked back? Is that accurate? I hope it is - cos I like this system!

Actually in a system like that I would force walk too. Especially if running lower stamina. Or at least an option to choose which one you use by default.

And I also think this system would be a good system to use. But I would definately vote for a strong locking system too. Such as the ones discussed earlier in the thread.

Yes Keshire i agree... i guess i forgot to add that lil' tid bit of info.
Indeed Walking should be default and of course the saberlocking factors razor talked about are needed here. The microsaberlocks should give the impressions the sabers are indeed connecting.

Cheers.

Hi, Ace pointed out to this, which I HAD seen before at some point or another. Let me try to get a few points across that I think are important.

First off, I think that if we are to do anything interesting, we first have to examine fighting games' systems and go from there. The fact is, the vast majority of the work has been already done there in terms of implementation (DOA-SC for parrying, for example.)

Second, Learning to use a stave or a longer saber BY THEMSELVES means actually no more work than learning how to handle one normal saber. I think higher costs should only be applied to learning double saber styles, and not even then because the person could've simply just skipped learning singlesaber style beforehand, thus making it the same ammount of effort than learning to master just one.

Third, the stamina bar idea thing sounds cute, but how are you handling respawns-deaths? What use is having a gradually degrading stamina system thing so complex when it won't be put to use 80% of the times due to simply dying too quickly and starting over at full stamina? You can't make the stamina decrease more drastic or anything because that'd be quite anti-jedi like (But it'd be better for gameplay. You decide).

Fourth, saber throwing is not a logical or sane battle move while at close range, because you're losing your weapon, no matter for how much time, you lost it. So that means that any slash you take while you're weaponless is one hit kill unless we do the dodge thingy. There must be an enormous penality for it simply due to the nature of the attack. To avoid this being a problem, I suggest leaving the saber throw as a secondary move that while is inneffective at 1x1 duel can be used as an aux move to help someone else in a fight, and can actually do regular slash+ damage. A support move, more or less.

Fifth, realistically, the only difference between running and walking in terms of defence is the fact that you're moving faster towards the objects, but in this case the objects are moving so fast already that your own speed added to them is probably not going to matter much if you're a jedi. I figure that the reason that you'd rather stand still or move slightly is to actually only attack through deflected fire rather than cutting through it and attacking yourself . Now the thing is, GAMEPLAY WISE, no matter what the movies say, Jedi and melee only guys MUST have a method of cutting through enemy shots in some form or another without getting killed becuase otherwise you're at a enormous disadvantage. My suggestion to fix this is an 'Attack Charge', of sorts, which allows you to run(jump, strafe) at full speed for 10 or so seconds while actually keeping defence at 100%, the only problem is that any attacking coming out of THAT mode will have a massive delay to it so that if you didn't take the chance well, you'll be pretty open, but if you took it, it's well worth it. (There's more to it, but that's the basic idea).

Sixth, the good'olde blade locking duels. The first thing about blade locking is that realistically your blades will never lock and REMAIN STILL, the minute they lock you'll want to disarm and move in for a strike or at the very least push the opponent away, so locking would be actually a quick tactical move. Ace's idea for when locking should occur makes sense, though on a gameplay level it'd be nice if there was a trigger for it which was set on stone that could be accessed. Such as parrying and instead of attacking you can 'push' the saber forth and lock up. As to why you'd realistically have that option, well, you can't 'disarm' people in the game I think, but it'd be neat if you could. Knock'em sabers away and then just slash their heads off.

Seventh, COMBOS. Why doesn't anyone think about this? Really, now. The only way you can actually get a 'dynamic' feel to it, at least emulate SOME of it, is to give the sensation that there is a reasonable chain of attacks that aren't 'spamming', and all of said hits are meant to be hitting. I think this would require some work to be implemented, but the general outline can be seen again in fighting games. In THIS case however you don't need the extra buttons because you can control the saber quickly enough with how it's set up or any other control methods.

Stay fresh!

Yes, I imagine that the dodge system will play a big role in all this, especially since real life players can't react with jedi-like reflexes.

For those that don't know what the Dodge system does, it's basically a "n00b/fudging" meter. It runs off a seperate gauge that drains power from the fatigue system to power itself. As long as you have enough Dodge remaining, your player will automatically dodge or block incoming attacks instead getting hit. Dodge recharges relatively quickly (probably a zero-full recharge in about 1 min) and sucks major amounts of stamina.

With this system (probably balanced of course), you'll be able to more accurately simulate reflexes (jedi or otherwise) and prolong battles a while so that each duel doesn't end the defender makes a mistake.

Dodge only takes effect if you screw up by not blocking the correct direction or when a shot gets thru. When Dodge takes over, your character either physically dodges the attack or blocks it with the saber, whatever is more appropreiate.

If the player runs out of stamina, it reverse drains energy from Dodge to give the player a slight reserve of fatigue. After that, you're in deep trouble.

Your Dodge abilities depend on your current skills. Jedi characters have much more Dodge/Fatigue than mercs/other classes.

So, to kill someone, you'd have to do one of three things:

1. Totally out skill them by quickly draining their Dodge with quick, well placed blows.

2. Slowly wear them down by tiring them out.

3. Hitting them while they are unable to Dodge. This will probably apply only in special cases.


On another subject, I think Ytmh has an interesting idea to have the parry ability go into a saberlock instead of just an automatic knockback.

However, we'll have to be sure to have it be balanced so that the defender has a good advantage to do that. We don't want to make attacking or defending too powerful. We want a balance so that players can be comfortable quickly switching from defense to attack and back.

Plus, from experimentation, the saber swing speeds will have to be slowed down to have any chance of skillful saber play. I've found that about %50 normal speed would be pretty good for the "average" level of difficulty. Beginner servers could probably use 25% or something.

Thx for contributing Ytmh.
I'll hit your points in turn...


First off ...examining other existing systems...


It's a good idea to examine existing systems - I agree. But I would keep in mind that sometimes it good to be original - i.e. not just do what anybody else has done in a slightly modified form...


Second - staff / dual sabers issues


I'm inclined to agree with you. I'd rather have single-saber / staff / dual sabers totally balanced, rather than one having to cost more skill points than the other...


Third ... stamina bar...


Your either not understanding the stamina system we are proposing, or you don't think it will be possible to find the correct levels of stamina loss (running, attacking etc.) and regain (blocking) appropiate to the desired average duration of duels.

The stamina level of the Jedi will be constantly going up and down as they attack and block - attack and block etc. etc. It doesn't matter that the stamina level goes back to full upon respawn - the same way that it doesn't matter that your force manna goes back to full upon respawn...


Fourth ..saber throw...


I would suggest leaving saber throw for a seperate discussion. The fact is that this new blocking system doesn't nessesarily mean saber throw has to go or stay - they are two different features which don't have to affect each-other.


Fifth.. walking while blocking


The temporary charge idea I already have implemented currently in Movie Battles. I basically have a sprint button, which allowes you to run pretty much at a full run, but still have full defense. (If you don't block while sprinting, you run at faster-then-normal pace.) This is to a maximum of 20 secs. Then, once you turn off sprint (by either hitting the sprint button again, or hitting walk / crouch), you then have to spend half the time you spent sprinting limited to a walk. i.e. you sprint for 10 secs - you must walk for 5 secs before you can resume a normal run...


Sixth ... saber locks


I don't know about 'literal' realism, but as far as Movie Realism, there are many differnt types of locks seen in the movies. Most of them are -as you say - just the sabers clashing, no real duration on the actual 'lock'. But there are other locks - ranging from a few ms to several seconds. So to be movie realistic, you need a decent range of locks, as far as duration.

As far as the locking stuff which Ace has suggested, I like it. It sounds similar to what I've done in MB, but (your right Razor), I just jump into the standard lock anims, but then jump back out again after a few ms. It was very easy to do, and it's farily effective. Razor's locks will look significantly more natural though...


Seventh... combos


I like the idea of combos - as long as it doesn't go over the top.
One other idea I have in mind is to not only have combo attacks, but also a combo defense to counter that attack. Exactly how the defender goes about defending the combo, or whether he gets to start defending in the middle of the combo, I'm not positive at this stage.
...but what I'm sure of are two things. It should be possible for the defender to defend against the whole combo in one go. (In my system, I see this as being if he directionally defends against the first attack of the chain). Secondly, assuming the defender acheives this, then both attacker and defender go into a pre-determined, simply breathtaking-looking sequence - which woudln't be posible during 'normal' combat. I think little sections like that would look simply awesome -and add a whole lot to the look and feel of the duels...