Well I'm used to automatic blocking, but if Raven decides to change it to manual, I can always adapt, it may take a little while to get used to after playing JO for some time, but like Silent_Thunder said it'll be like a second nature.

I would definately say manual.

One of the things that irked me about JO was the fact that the saber fighting in SP (I never liked MP, hrmm) felt a bit detached. Sure I could use my force powers and swing pretty accurately, but I couldn't control half of the fight: that is reactional blocking, not automatic blocking.

It may slow saber fights down a bit, but they would be much more intense as one must trust ones own skill to win, and not a computers number crunching. I think it would make the game a tighter package, more well rounded and just more fun/enjoyable.

I won't be singin' the blues if automatic is left out: I see it as more of a stepping stone to better things, more precisely reactional blocking.

the problem (from my very limited experience of JK2) was that the blocking animation was so short.... meaning you could block anything that flew at you.

in JK (which wasn't perfect either) at least the blocking animation took a few frames, so if you blocked a shot it took half a second before you could block another one. (making repeaters or multiple enemies more deadly).

I think the time taken to block should depend on the angle the shooter is away from straight ahead... so you could block almost anything from directly infronto of you, 20 degrees to the side and it takes a second or so, 90 degrees to the side and it takes 3 seconds or so.
Also each successive block should increase the time it takes to block... so if you keep blocking then it will eventually let people get through your attack... not blocking would allow the block speed to go back up... attacking would instantly reset the block speed (making block, attack, block a good way to go).

This would also increase the usefullness of the quicker saber styles as you could get through defences easier.

Another option would be to have a very narrow autoblock cone (45 degrees) and have a block button to increase this to about 270 degrees.

Sending shots back at enemies should definately reduce your force meter.

auto- why? because it's easier for me, a not-very coordinated guy, and i'm almost out of keys to use on my keyboard :)

Originally posted by Matariel
If there were a hold button for 'defensive' mode, it would allow for better blocking and countering and make a much more exciting game.

I hate quick deaths in saber fights, since when have you known a jedi duel to last less that 10 seconds? Every duel in the movies lasts at least more than 5 minutes, and the hits are few and far between. Why would this make for better blocking and countering? Having a block button would make for even quicker fights than we have now, because they would rely on people's slower reflexes to block. The auto-blocking is what makes JO saber fights take longer, not shorter.

Originally posted by toms
I think the time taken to block should depend on the angle the shooter is away from straight ahead... so you could block almost anything from directly in front of you, 20 degrees to the side and it takes a second or so, 90 degrees to the side and it takes 3 seconds or so.I don't really agree with the increased time with blocking something from the side. But I do agree with having the angle help determine the blocking success. Attacks from the side should be a little harder to defend against than attacks from directly in front.

Originally posted by Prime
Why would this make for better blocking and countering? Having a block button would make for even quicker fights than we have now, because they would rely on people's slower reflexes to block. The auto-blocking is what makes JO saber fights take longer, not shorter.
word... right now, all you have to do is not attack, if you want to block a great deal of the hits...

I voted for "new system" and have tried to work out a system that, I think, would both reward skill and allow new players the ability to learn to play effectively. Hopefully there would be a learning curve, without there being a real barrier to becoming reasonably proficient. Essentially, the system I propose is a hybrid of autoblocking and manual blocking, though it rewards the manual blocker more (as pointed out, the force controls your actions, but also obeys your commands -- having more "command" over the force, therefore, is rewarded) So, here goes.

(get comfy -- this could take a bit to explain) I've revised this from a post in a different thread, so bear with me.

Ok for starters, toss out your traditional notions of JO sabre combat, including how you gain access to sabre moves.

For this system, everyone starts with access to all of the basic three single-sabre stances, and can perform all moves. Essentially, if you pick level 1 of sabre offense, you immediately gain the ability to use blue, yellow, and red stances, including all the various special moves (DFA, lunge, etc.). Furthermore, sabres are now truly lethal: 1 to 3 hits (maybe 1 to 2) and the enemy is toast. This alone allows for gametypes like CTF and FFA to be MUCH faster, since it requires significantly fewer hits to actually kill the player. Essentially, every swing operates at the lethality of red stance from JO. Sabres are also unaffected by shields -- they cut right through and affect health. (Sure, Maul's sabre was stopped by shields, but those are massive industrial strength shields, not the weaker personal shield belts we see in the DF series.) Blue stance will also no longer be able to infinitely chain moves -- it now has an upper cap of 8 chainable attacks. Red and yellow remain the same (3 chainable attacks for red, five for yellow). Each stance still has differences still, but the key differences are how each of the stances interact with each other. Here's where things get tricky.

Similar to what was intended by JO, each stance can trump another stance for purposes of offense or defense. Each stance is assigned an offensive value and a defensive value. When attacking, you look to the attack value of the attacker's stance as compared to the defense value of the defender's stance. The basic three stances break down in the following manner:

Red = 3 on O, 1 on D.
Yellow = 2 on O, 2 on D.
Blue = 1 on O, 3 on D.

Thus,

Red O > Red D and Yellow D; Red O = Blue D.
Yellow O > Red D; Yellow O = Yellow D; Yellow O < Blue D.
Blue O = Red D; Blue O <Yellow D and Blue D.

When your O rating is higher than the defender's D rating, you will batter their defenses aside only if you have a 2 point advantage over them. When your D rating is higher than the attacker's O rating, you will perform an automatic parryif you have a 2 point margin. Thus, a single red attack will batter aside red D in one blow, whereas a blue defender will automatically parry against a blue attacker using basic attacks. When either a parry is performed or you batter through defenses, the visual result is essentially that animation where you're sabre has been knocked aside and you'er standing with your arms spread, open to attack or counter-attack -- it wouldn't necessarily have to be this animation, but something along those lines. When there is no 2 point margin, you will simply perform automatic blocks -- manual blocks will have no effect (EXCEPT when you break even).

When you break even (Blue O v. Red D; Yellow O v. Yellow D; Red O v. Blue D), the following system kicks in. In these situations, the defender is given the option of the following: they can choose to "let the force take over" and perform a series of automatic blocks, OR they can use the force to a limited degree and then begin "controlling the force" by executing manual blocks. If you choose to sit back and let the computer block for you, you will block fewer attacks, whereas if you use the manual block, you can block more moves.

So, the following system would be set up:

- Blue O v. Red D - Red D is given 4 automatic blocks. Red D may then manually block 4 further moves.
- Yellow O v. Yellow D - Yellow D is given 3 automatic blocks, and may then perform 2 manual blocks.
- Red O v. Blue D - Blue D is given 2 automatic blocks and one manual block.

Thus, if you can effectively block in time, you will be able to hold your attacker at bay through a chain of attacks, ASSUMING all things are equal.

However, in this system, all things need not be equal.

Combos will have the additional advantage of being able to break through all but the strongest defenses (IE: you can't combo your way through a blue on blue confrontation or a red on red confrontation). When you attack with a one point advantage (IE: Yellow O v. Red D), you will perform the abovementioned number of automatic blocks ONLY. After that, it is your job to get the hell out of the way or get hit (and possibly die -- remember, every hit will do AT A MINIMUM 1/3 of your health bar's damage), since you will not manually block these moves any differently from automatically blocking them. (You could still activate the manual blocking, but it'll just have the same effect as the auto block against that particular stance, so there's really no point.)

When in a break-even situation, you CAN still break through the defenses, even after you've performed your maximum number of chainable attacks. Each successful combo will be given an attack bonus. Combos, moreover, are NOT necessarily chained identical moves. Hitting attack+back+right 8 times in a row in blue stance is not an 8 move combo. A combo would have at least one different move interspersed between identical moves. So, you'd have to do alternating attack+back+right, followed by attack+back+left to get a two move combo.

Combos for each stance would be given the following sliding-scale value. Each time you successfully perform a combo, the bonus number applies to a calculation of the NUMBER of the attacks, not the VALUE of the attacks.

Legend: # of moves in combo/+ # of attacks added as bonus

Blue stance: 2/+.25, 3/+.375, 4/+.5, 5/+.625, 6/+.75, 7/+.875, 8/+1.
Yellow stance: 2/+.4, 3/+.6, 4/+.8, 5/+1.
Red stance: 2/+.67, 3/+1

To batter through defenses using combos in a break-even situation, you would have to have a clear 1 attack advantage. To make the above moves worthwhile (why have the scaled bonus, if you can only break through D with that last move), the defender's blocking status will reset within a specified number of seconds, depending on the particular stance being used against them. This, however, would be dependent upon what Raven would consider a combo for purposes of the game. Personally, I'd make each stance different in terms of the number of different consecutive moves you'd have to execute before you could start throwing in moves you'd already done -- IE: Blue stance would require four different moves in a row before you could recycle moves (and even then, they'd have to come in a different sequence), whereas yellow would require only 2 moves. Because red only can chain 3 moves at a time, you could have identical 2-move combos and not screw up the balance (though the third move would have to be different to provide the defense-breaking combo). You'd still let the player chain the full number of moves (combo or otherwise) before they'd be stopped and have to start attacking again, and if the player switched stances, the defender's auto/manual block would reset (so you couldn't perform a 2 move red combo, then switch to

To prevent against the repeated spamming of a particular move, each stance would also have a sliding scale to represent a decline in the total NUMBER of attacks (again, not the VALUE) if you repeat the same move over and over. Each time you repeated a single move, you'd subtract the penalty from the number of attacks. This, however, would only kick in at the point where the autoblocking stops working. This would break down in the following manner:

Legend: # of repeated identical moves/ - # of attacks for purposes of blocking calculation.

Blue: 5/-1.125, 6/-1.25, 7/-1.375, 8/-1.5.
Yellow: 3/-1.2, 4/-1.4, 5/-1.6.
Red: 3/-1.

The net effect of this would be that if, for example, you attack with red against a blue defender, and you performed three identical strikes in a row, all three would be autoblocked. You wouldn't be parried, but none of your attacks would break through the defenses. With yellow on yellow, if you performed three identical moves in a row, for blocking purposes, you'd only be credited with 1.8 attacks. So, for purposes of autoblocking, you'd still have 2.2 attacks left that would be autoblocked.

The actual mechanism of manual blocking would have to occur with split-second timing, too. It would be an actual button that would be pressed and held, but you'd have to press it at just the right moment in BETWEEN attacks during a combo. So, in the midst of an 8 move blue combo, you'd have to hit red's manual block button at the perfect moment (whenever Raven determined that to be) between swings 4 and 5. Otherwise, you'd have to evade, rather than autoblock.

You could make things more complex by factoring in respective levels of sabre offense vs. sabre defense. Each time you picked a higher level, you'd essentially shift the VALUE of your stances up by one point for purposes of attack or defense, respectively. So, a person with level 3 attack would use blue's attack at a value of 4, whereas a person with level 3 defense would use blue's defense at a value of 6 (see? still maintains the 2 point margin, all things being equal). The number of attacks would still be the same, but for purposes of trumping or breaking through defenses automatically, the value that you'd check would be one higher per level of offense or defense you took.

Where things would get REALLY interesting is when you factor in the "specialty" stances. Once you'd picked level 3 saber offense or sabre defense, you'd be given the ability to assign further points to a new stance, either the double-bladed sabre (for offense) or dual sabres (for defense). These stances would operate in the following way (for purposes of both stances, assume that the calculations are applied to level 1 opposition);

Double-Bladed sabre:

- Attacks at a base of 7, defends at 2-3, depending on the stance attacking it.
- Chains up to 5 attacks.
- Combo bonuses: 2/+.4, 3/+.6, 4/+.8, 5/+1
- Against Yellow O, defends as if Yellow D (for block calculations). Against Red O, defends as if blue D. Thus, it can break even with both yellow attacks and red attacks, but is truly dominant on the attack (if you go up against a lvl 1 defender with this, you have an attack value of 7 -- no way they can block you).
- Decline rate for identical chained attacks: 3/-1.2, 4/-1.4, 5/-1.6.
- Can switch to single-bladed mode and operate as a normal single-bladed sabre at any time.

Dual Sabres:

- Attack at a base of 2-3, depending on the stance it is attacking, defends at a base of 7.
- Chains up to 12 attacks.
- Combo bonuses: 2/+.16, 3/+.25, 4/+.33, 5/+.42, 6/+.5, 7/+.58, 8/+.67, 9/+.75, 10/+.83, 11/+.92, 12/+1
- Against both yellow and blue D, the stance breaks even, BUT the defender is given 6 autoblocks and 5 manual blocks.
- Decline rate for identical chained attacks: 6/-1.08, 7/-1.16, 8/-1.25, 9/-1.33, 10/-1.42, 11/-1.5, 12/-1.58.
- At any time, can turn off the second sabre and holster it, to function as single bladed sabre.

Ok, so, great. I've now come up with a rather complex system with a crapload of numbers that make my eyes hurt to look at. What's the end result?

Well, the system I'm proposing would actually reward skill. You'd really have to become facile with the various stances to learn the combinations in order to effectively break defenses. On D, you'd really have to learn when to properly time your manual block -- it wouldn't just be up to the computer. Moreover, you wouldn't just be able to sit back with blue defense, walk away from the computer, and let it infinitely autoblock for you -- there'd actually be an upper limit to the number of attacks you could block. Ultimately, the skilled players would be rewarded, but at the same time, a newbie (not a n00b) who knows when discretion is the better part of valor would still be able to let the computer handle SOME of the blocking, but not ALL of the blocking. And finally, you wouldn't be able to just spam a single move over and over in a chain and call it a "combo." You'd actually have to do more than just button mashing or the old "headless chicken" dance in blue stance in order to win. Thus, there'd be a learning curve, but not an insurmountable one, and at the same time, the skilled would be rewarded for playing smart and knowing the subtleties of the game.

Now, I know Raven isn't going to adopt this system, not at the start at least. But it is a system that, while complicated, could work well in practice. All those numbers would be handled by the engine itself. All the player would have to know how to do is perform the combos, and what stance is better against another on O or D (and when to block or when to cut and run).

Another system could be the blocking "bar" suggested above, where you can block for X amount of time or against Y number of attacks.

Finally, a third option for auto vs. manual blocking would be that you leave autoblocking the way it is in JO (albeit making it less random), but have a PARRY button instead of a block button. Thus, you could sit on your duff and do nothing, and let the autoblocking protect you, but you'd never get in an attack. The real skill would come in when you press the parry button, which would allow you to move from the defensive to the offensive without breaking stride or running away. It would also leave the enemy open to counter attack. The parry button would also be used to direct blaster fire or other similar projectiles back at enemy gunners (so you couldn't sit there and let them kill themselves -- you'd actually have to take an active role in that). You could also still implement the trump system I described above (IE: which stance has a higher "value" over other stances), even if the stances themselves don't operate the way I described 'em (IE: the caps on chains, combo bonuses, spam decline, etc.). The stuff I suggested might make a nice addition to a mod (IE: promod or something like it), rather than the full game.

Assuming they leave out much of the stuff I suggested, I'd say that a parry button (rather than a block button -- let the blocking be automatic) would be the perfect blend of the two worlds.

Anyway, sorry for that Russian novel of a post there. I had a complicated system in mind and wanted to get it written down somewhere before I forgot. Plus, I'm curious as to what people who actually want to bother to read the whole damn thing think about it. :)

Solo, you make Dostoevsky look like an average person. =p

Nice post.

When swordfighting in any style, there are specific offensive and defensive moves. But in jk2 right now, its just all offensive, (except in SP but thats automatic) it just looks silly to watch.
If there were a hold button for 'defensive' mode, it would allow for better blocking and countering and make a much more exciting game. I hate quick deaths in saber fights, since when have you known a jedi duel to last less that 10 seconds? Every duel in the movies lasts at least more than 5 minutes, and the hits are few and far between.


The one thing I have yet to see people attempt to rectify here is the bandwidth/latency that is incorporated into both offense and defense. Everything may look good on paper here, but that is assuming it is a constant 0 ping interface.

We have to be realistic. Not everyone is going to have an uber connection.

That's why I am for autoblocking.

Originally posted by eastcoast2895
i'm just saying alt fire may not work cuz it probably be binded to saber throw Saber Throw shall begone! I hope. ;)

Originally posted by Rad Blackrose
Solo, you make Dostoevsky look like an average person. =p

Nice post.

Yeah, I suppose reading it could be considered crime and punishment. :D Thanks, though.

I just wanted to explain what was a fairly complex idea for me to come up with. I didn't want there to be details left out.

The more I look at it, though, and compare it to what Raven's said will happen with the dual sabres and double-bladed sabres, the less likely I think it is that the style I proposed will be used.

I still think it'd make a good mod, but Raven sure won't be the ones making it.

So, I guess as far as the auto vs. manual blocking goes, I'm going to reiterate that I support autoblocking, but manual parrying using a separate "parry" button (not simply attacking when the enemy attacks). Whatever system is incorporated should be balanced such that no one stance is able to trump all others in all aspects (IE: red is awesome for O, but crap for D, blue is the opposite, and yellow is a mix. Dual blades give you awesome D and somewhere between blue and yellow on O. Double-bladed sabres give you awesome O and somewhere between red and yellow on D). While the double-blade and dual sabres should be powerful (especially if you have to spend beaucoup points to get 'em, and I bet we'll have to do just that), they should not be all-powerful in any sense.

For example, dual sabres may be fast, but they are weaker in terms of breaking through defenses (since you're only attacking with one hand, as opposed to two). Double-bladed sabres provide fantastic range, but are cumbersome and unwieldy, and require wide swings to use. Thus, they leave you open to being parried more easily. Something like that.

I think my trump system would work well there, and that's something that Raven could still use, especially with regards to the offense/defense points that you assign and how they relate to all the other stances.

Originally posted by Rad Blackrose
The one thing I have yet to see people attempt to rectify here is the bandwidth/latency that is incorporated into both offense and defense. Everything may look good on paper here, but that is assuming it is a constant 0 ping interface.
the latency would be exactly the same with defence as it is with offense... it really wouldn't be that huge of a problem.

I don't really know about the sabre blocking, but I think, that the laser blocking should be more realistic. Because, sometimes, in JO Kyle is justto the left, an holding his saber d he's blocking a shot over his head at the same time! If there's going to be manual sabere blocking, I think, that you could go into something like "the-force-is-now-controling-your-blocking", or a better force-speed!

Originally posted by t3rr0r
the latency would be exactly the same with defence as it is with offense... it really wouldn't be that huge of a problem. I think the problem arises because of the combination of the two. Currently, there is only the latency of the attack swings. Since the defence is always "on" there is not latency for the game to know that you are defending. However, if you add a block button, the game no longer knows automatically that you are defending when your not attacking. There would be the added latency for you defense command. So the latency would potentially be attack + defend.

Originally posted by Prime
So the latency would potentially be attack + defend.
no, it wouldn't add onto the latency... the code would just have one additional latency dependant action. hell, the guns are more dependant on latency than the saber is.

saber throw on the second mouse button did get a bit OTT didnt it? :D

making the second button a counterattack/reversal button would be better than making a manual block. HOlding it would just attempt to block... but pressing it at the right time would perform knock the attacking saber away and counterattack... a devastating move, but risky as you would have to remain open.

Originally posted by t3rr0r
no, it wouldn't add onto the latency... the code would just have one additional latency dependant action. hell, the guns are more dependant on latency than the saber is. That's true. My thinking was a bit screwy I guess :)

I agree that guns are much more affected by latency, but I am only considering duels here. But do not agree that the overall latency of the game will be increased by adding a blocking button? I guess I don't see what the blocking button really gives you that makes it worth adding more latency.

Manual blocking would be better. It should consist of a button that activates the normal blocking code, that currently automatically comes into effect in JO when one is not attacking.

Therefore, it wouldn't add any lag at all, as the transition from blocking to attacking goes on throughout a duel anyway. It would merely put it under the control of the player.

See, I think the existing blocking code needs some tweaking, though it may be the hit detection, and not the blocking itself.

Al, assuming that we implemented a system where blocking was left the same, but activated by a button, how would you handle the apparent ability to block ad infinitum using particular stances? Would you change this or leave it the same and trust to people's reflexes to be the ultimate determination of when a hit is scored? I'll admit, your system would be a relatively simple thing to fix (or so it seems -- again, no knowledge of how to code here). But wouldn't you also have the problem of people just running around holding block all the time? That would end up being not all that much different from the current system.

I think you'd need to have some sort of decline in blocking ability, the longer you try to block for. Otherwise, people will just basically spam blocking.

On a different note, one alternative for autoblocking would be to have the success percentage depend on the angle of attack. The closer to straight on the attack comes from, the more likely you are to block it. Your defense arc could be tied directly to the level of sabre defense you pick -- lvl 1 has a 90 degree arc from the player's center, lvl 2 has a 135 degree arc, and lvl 3 has a 180 degree arc. But, even within those arcs, you'd still have a decline in blocking success, the farther away you are from center. The one problem I foresee with this system is that it would reduce sabre fights to people constantly using side attacks,which would get old after a while.

Originally posted by Solo4114
But wouldn't you also have the problem of people just running around holding block all the time? That would end up being not all that much different from the current system.

I think you'd need to have some sort of decline in blocking ability, the longer you try to block for. Otherwise, people will just basically spam blocking.
they could make it that you could block 75% (these are just numbers i'm putting out there) holding defence while standing still, 50% while walking, and 25% while running... imo, something along the lines of that could work...

Do you mean that you'd have, for example, a 75% chance of blocking, or that when being attacked by yellow stance, you'd block the first 4 and the 5th would get through?

Originally posted by Solo4114
Do you mean that you'd have, for example, a 75% chance of blocking
yes, there'd be a 25% chance that you'd be hit, which only increases with movement.

Originally posted by Spider AL
Therefore, it wouldn't add any lag at all, as the transition from blocking to attacking goes on throughout a duel anyway. It would merely put it under the control of the player. But wouldn't there be lag when the player hits the block button? Maybe I can explain what I'm thinking.

When a player hits the attack button, there is lag from when this happens to when the swing starts. We have that now, so no problem. When the swing completes, now the player wants to defend. Currently, the game knows that if the player isn't attacking, they are defending. There is no lag here because the game automatically defends.

Now for manual blocking. When the player's attack swing finishes, he wants to defend so he hits the block button. Isn't there lag from the time the button is pressed to when the game turns on blocking mode?

Just trying to clear tis up for myself :)

Originally posted by t3rr0r
they could make it that you could block 75% (these are just numbers i'm putting out there) holding defence while standing still, 50% while walking, and 25% while running... imo, something along the lines of that could work...Would this mean that players would become very reluctant to move around, because they would be automatically opening themselves up? Don't we want to keep the game active and free-flowing? I don't think you really want to penalize movement too much.

Not to bring the movies into it, but aren't the lightsaber fights we know have quick moves with lots of flips, rolls, and so on?

Originally posted by Prime
Would this mean that players would become very reluctant to move around, because they would be automatically opening themselves up? Don't we want to keep the game active and free-flowing? I don't think you really want to penalize movement too much.
well, i was just giving some numbers for examples... they could be as different as 10% (chance not blocking), 20%, and 30%...

Originally posted by Silent_Thunder
Thanks, but it's actually pretty much the way that old PS1 game... Jedi Power Battles (note; I'm not advocating buying it) did it. So the accuracy thing isn't really my idea :).

i like jedi power battles and i agree that a similar style would be good for JA.
but i think that blocking laser blasts should be automatic. whereas in a duel you have to manually block sabers.
when you watch saber duels in the films, one will be on the defensive while the other offensive and then vice versa. that would be alot better than just hacking away at each other.

Personnally i want Promod Saber blocking : It s not manual nor it s random ...... it s totally dependent on your aiming skill wich is what a FPS is and should be about.

i want it to be manual, and depend on where you aim. you must block each saber attack with a directional press of your block or 'defence' key, similar to the way you attack. A correct block means 100% damage blocked, if you're too slow or go the wrong side, theres a percentage damage depending on the situation, only if you dont block at all you get 100% damage

Implementing a counter to a button instead of a block would make it worth-wile for saber fights.

I think something everyone's overlooking with the whole manual blocking issue is internet lag. With most of the systems described here, you've not only got to see your opponent swinging, but you have to know precisely which attack he's doing, judge the distance between you and him, and then hit the so-called "block" button at the right time. With a ping of 100ms (pretty common) and a standard human reflex reaction time of 100ms, then that attack is going to be 200ms along its path long before you even begin to process what to do about it.

Originally posted by ArtifeX
I think something everyone's overlooking with the whole manual blocking issue is internet lag. With most of the systems described here, you've not only got to see your opponent swinging, but you have to know precisely which attack he's doing, judge the distance between you and him, and then hit the so-called "block" button at the right time. With a ping of 100ms (pretty common) and a standard human reflex reaction time of 100ms, then that attack is going to be 200ms along its path long before you even begin to process what to do about it. A very good point.

Originally posted by t3rr0r
well, i was just giving some numbers for examples... they could be as different as 10% (chance not blocking), 20%, and 30%...It would certainly need some good play testing to find out what good numbers might look like...

Originally posted by Prime
It would certainly need some good play testing to find out what good numbers might look like...

All the more reason why Raven/Lucasarts should release a multiplayer demo BEFORE the game hits the stores. And one of the main reasons why I'll be waiting for both SP and MP demos prior to buying the game. I want to make DAMN sure that Raven gets it right on both accounts before I plunk down my cash this time. And review magazines/websites will likely just hype the game. "It's got incredible new graphics!" "You can fight a Rancor! Cool!" "You can use two sabres or a dual-bladed sabre! Cool!" "You can combine force powers! Neato!" "Any Star Wars fan who plays this game for only 10 hours over a 5 day period will love this game for all time! I SWEAR!!" :)

Originally posted by ArtifeX
I think something everyone's overlooking with the whole manual blocking issue is internet lag. With most of the systems described here, you've not only got to see your opponent swinging, but you have to know precisely which attack he's doing, judge the distance between you and him, and then hit the so-called "block" button at the right time. With a ping of 100ms (pretty common) and a standard human reflex reaction time of 100ms, then that attack is going to be 200ms along its path long before you even begin to process what to do about it.

And also once you press your block button, the server has to register that you did so, which will introduce even more lag. For those of you concerned with manual blocking for the sake of introducing a new factor to the game, or for better showing skill in game, I suggest you try ProMod... which it appears many of you either haven't tried or don't like. If the latter, I don't know why -- it adds some nice complexity to the game in a way that is simple to understand and seamlessly integrated into the game.

Apart from lag, I really don't see how having a block button is really going to change things. Whenever someone isn't attacking, they are going to be holding down the block button. Isn't that exactly the same as auto-blocking is now? The only thing different is that you are holding down a button the whole time.

What do people expect will be different by adding a block button?

See, that's why I think a block button itself wouldn't do it. It'd be better to leave autoblocking (although modify it so you can't do it forever and against every stance), and have a button that you can hit to PARRY. This would require you to appropriately time the parry, then follow up with a counter-attack.

what you need to do is make repeated blocking more difficult. Have either a minimum time between blocks that goes up with repeated blocks, or a percentage chance of blocking that goes down with repeated blocks.

This would reset slowly over time when not blocking.

Then have an attacking move reset this blocking time/chance.

That way people have to block then attack, then block strategically.

A possible enhancement would be for the scale of the effect on the blocking delay/chance to be related to the strength of the blow... so a powerful blow that was blocked would reduce their chances of blocking the next blow... meaning a quick attack might get through.

-----

Personally i think the second button should be used for either:

-kicks, (in all directions)
-directional blows (in all directions, while the first button does frontal attacks)
-alternate speed attacks... so in the red stance it would do a quick, light attack, but in the blue stance it would do a strong, slow attack. (it would be nice to be able to vary strengths and speeds on the fly, rather than changing stances)

Saber throw is actually used twice in the movies.

Vader, as everyone knows about and might i add that that was not ineffective because he wasn't trying to kill luke he was destroying the thing he was stood on.

Dooku uses it when he fights Yoda in AotC, just as yoda does his bouncing off the wall act, dooku's saber narrowly misses him when he throws it.

Toms, check the post I made earlier in the thread (the really LONG one). I described a potential system where blocking ability reduces over time and where the ability to string moves together in a combo gives a greater likelihood of breaking defenses.

Originally posted by Wavey Davey
Saber throw is actually used twice in the movies. Allow me to retort...

Originally posted by Wavey Davey
Vader, as everyone knows about and might i add that that was not ineffective because he wasn't trying to kill luke he was destroying the thing he was stood on. This has been discussed at great length, and I don't want to go through that again here. But lets look at what we actually see, and go from there. What we see is Vader toss his lightsaber at the walkway Luke is on. There is no evidence that Vader is using the Force to guide his lightsaber to the target. Much more likely, he is just physically throwing it, like you or I could. Secondly, we do not see the saber fly back neatly into Vader's had right after he throws it. Certainly, he could easily call it back after he has thrown it, but the movies show no evidence that Jedi/Sith/whatever throw their lightsabers, guide them to their target, and immediately pull them back before they hit the ground.

Originally posted by Wavey Davey
Dooku uses it when he fights Yoda in AotC, just as yoda does his bouncing off the wall act, dooku's saber narrowly misses him when he throws it. Check again, the scene I believe you are refering too, when Yoda hops up and around on the wall, we see the tip of Dooku's saber zip buy. I think it is quite clear that Dooku is just taking a swing at Yoda, not throwing his saber at him.

Or are you refering to something else?

By manually blocking, do you mean *hold down a button and block whatever comes your way* or *hit a button to block every individual shot*? And btw I don't think that a system where blocking probability decreases is good because that would make the Imperial Heavy Repeater and E-11 Blaster too powerful. People could just sit there and repeat at you until your blocking chance went down far enough that you could easily be killed. I like blocking the way it is; I say, don't change it.

People would NOT be holding the block button down the whole time their not attacking. No, the block button (which would surely be the right mouse key), when pressed would bring the saber up in a defensive position, enabiling AUTO blocks to be more succesful. The longer the saber is up in the block position the more force power is used, and the less success you have with deflecting an attack. Therefore, it would be logical to assume that most people would attempt to time thier blocks just right when being shot at, or seeing an obviously-telegraphed saber swing. At other times players would rather hold down the block button, even though it may not be quite as effective as timing it just right -- for example; succesful blocking of repeater fire would defiantly need the Jedi to hold the block key down.

So, in the end 'manual' blocking (it STILL is auto blocking, in reality) would merely be in place to make blocking JUST if not MORE effective than before, but requir more skill than just standing still and waiting...

Actually, after some thought, this is how I think the blocking should work:

When your character is not attacking you have a good chance of blocking attacks that are launched at, or very close to your saber. This is just a weaker version of the auto blocking we currently see. All deflected shots fly off in random locations, and do not home in on the attacker.

When you hold down the right mouse key your character goes into a more defensive position. While in this position you will have a chance to block attacks that come at you from any direction. The farther away from your saber an attack comes, the less likely it is for you to block it. The longer you hold down the block key the less likely for a succesfuly block you will have. Therefore a quick tap of the block key would be most effective -- but it would require much more timing, especially in lightsaber duels. When deflecting a laser or other projectile the deflected projectile will be launched at the NPC that is closest to where your recticle is pointing. It wouldn't require perfect aiming to deflect a shot... it would simply be reflected to the NPC that the Saber Blocking system detects you are targeting.

While holding down the saber block the jedi moves slower, uses up force power, and exhausts the success rate of blocking.

When a player succesfully blocks another player with a lightsaber the one who is blocked is slightly penalized for a brief moment. The one who is blocked has his saber slightly pushed out of the way, making a counter block harder to accomplish (since it's farther away). This would not be an artificial penalty, but merely one that is logical since the saber is farther away. The farther away a saber is knocked away would depend on how long the blocking player held the block key. The longer the block key is held, the smaller advantage it will give. Therefore a quick tap of the block key would give the biggest advantage, and a long held out defensive manuever, with a succesful block will result in virtually no advantage except the damage saved from blocking.

When two lightsabers strike each other in an attack move, but neither player blocks, the two sabers will block each other, but neither player will be penalized.

I personally think this kind of compromized system, where the blocking system is still virtually automatic, but where the clear gameplay advantages of the manual blocking system are still in place, will give the most movie like, and strategic saber fighting yet.

BTW, I never saw Dooku throw his saber in AotCs... I might have missed it though. I did see him doing a funky spin move where he spun counter clockwise while switching his saber from one hand to the other, and swinging clockwise... It looked vaguely similar to the move in JO where you get the saber to spin around you momentarily.

There should be a server side option to select if blocking is manual or automatic.
Most people preffer automatic blocking, but I say that in order to become a real Jedi(or Sith), you need to be in FULL controll of your saber.

Originally posted by boinga1
By manually blocking, do you mean *hold down a button and block whatever comes your way* or *hit a button to block every individual shot*? And btw I don't think that a system where blocking probability decreases is good because that would make the Imperial Heavy Repeater and E-11 Blaster too powerful. People could just sit there and repeat at you until your blocking chance went down far enough that you could easily be killed. I like blocking the way it is; I say, don't change it. This was exactly the issue brought up in one of the older threads, and it is a good one. As soon as you make it so that blocking becomes steadily worse over time, opponants are just going to wear you down until you can't defend yourself.

Originally posted by Silent_Thunder
People would NOT be holding the block button down the whole time their not attacking. No, the block button (which would surely be the right mouse key), when pressed would bring the saber up in a defensive position, enabiling AUTO blocks to be more succesful. The longer the saber is up in the block position the more force power is used, and the less success you have with deflecting an attack. Therefore, it would be logical to assume that most people would attempt to time thier blocks just right when being shot at, or seeing an obviously-telegraphed saber swing. At other times players would rather hold down the block button, even though it may not be quite as effective as timing it just right -- for example; succesful blocking of repeater fire would defiantly need the Jedi to hold the block key down.But what about the problem mentioned above from boinga1's post? If me attacking you means I lower your force pool and you become less effective at defending, I am just going to load up on ammo for my blaster rifle and repeater. Then I'm just going to stand there are hold down the trigger. You can't let go of the block button because then your dead. Two things are going to happen next. First, I will keep firing until you have no force left and thus can't defend against my fire. I win as I pump you full of bolts. So Easy. Or I might fire at you and again drain your force pool. Now I decide to bust out my grip and lightning. Since you have no force available for absorb, I just BBQ you and then grip you into a pit. Too easy, as all I had to do what continually shoot at you.

Being able to block with the same effectiveness forces me to use another tactic because just alt-firing the blaster gains me nothing. The lightsaber is already limited against guns because of its extremely short range. It's main usefulness in guns FFA is as a defensive tool. Adding a force tax on top of it makes the lighsaber really useless.

Against guns, you could have a different calculation come into effect. Whereas your blocking likelihood decreases quickly against a concentrated sabre attack, against a single opponent firing continuously at you, you could have that decrease take MUCH longer. Not so long as to deplete the opponent's ammunition, but long enough that you can close the distance against them.

Alternatively, you could have a system where the type of projectile has a different penetration value for purposes of blocking. So while you could shoot a whole mess of repeater primary shots at someone, most of them would not get through because they'd have a weaker penetration value. The E-11 would have a slightly higher value, etc., etc. This could also allow for the incorporation of heavier blaster weapons and move us away from the explosive weapons we saw in JO. The heavier the blaster you use, the more likely you are to penetrate defenses in shorter time.

Originally posted by Solo4114
Against guns, you could have a different calculation come into effect. Whereas your blocking likelihood decreases quickly against a concentrated sabre attack, against a single opponent firing continuously at you, you could have that decrease take MUCH longer. Not so long as to deplete the opponent's ammunition, but long enough that you can close the distance against them. But if they keep backing up, how will you close the distance :) Picky, I know, but even with full blocking now, it is not always easy getting to gunners. Good gunners keep well out of range of the sabers. And then your right back to the same problem of running out of Force power and getting toasted.

Originally posted by Solo4114
Alternatively, you could have a system where the type of projectile has a different penetration value for purposes of blocking. So while you could shoot a whole mess of repeater primary shots at someone, most of them would not get through because they'd have a weaker penetration value. The E-11 would have a slightly higher value, etc., etc. This could also allow for the incorporation of heavier blaster weapons and move us away from the explosive weapons we saw in JO. The heavier the blaster you use, the more likely you are to penetrate defenses in shorter time. Not to get into all sorts of technical silliness, but I would think a weapon that fires more shots is more likely to score a hit, simply because you have to deflect more shots. More powerful energy weapons shouldn't be harder, but easier to defend against, because they fire fewer shots. Since they are all energy, the lighsaber can physically deflect them just as easily. But that's not the real issue.

The real issue as I see it is that all this doesn't make lightsaber combat better. It just makes it different. Why is manual blocking going to make duels and so on better? It's not like players can't score hits now. Manual blocking seems to just add one more control you have to worry about when fighting. There are already enough of those when you are using force powers. :)

Ok, so if the guns fire pure energy with no concussive effect, why do they so obviously recoil in the movies? And why do they fire in bolts instead of rays???? HMMMMMM??? Don't have an answer for THAT now DO ya, smart guy? :) (not that it really matters anyway)

As for the backing up issue, didn't Raven slow down backup speed relative to the other directions? I thought that was something they did with 1.04 (one of the good things, actually).

You'd still need to have some sort of point where the blocking ability is used up, and that's where the different charged projectiles would come in. Less powerful projectiles would use that ability up slower, whereas more powerful projectiles would use it up faster. That said, if you can fire a butt-load of smaller charged projectiles in a short span of time, you'll use up the blocking ability that much faster. I don't, however, think this should be tied to the force. This should be something that goes on behind the scenes (and maybe you get a visual indicator of when you're going to run out of blocking power).

As for why manual blocking is better it's precisely because you get more control. It would also require that people LEARN to control that ability rather than just trust the computer. Yes, you can currently score hits on people, but it's fairly random, not tied to aim at all, and you still have no control over it. Regardless, I think the blocking itself could be automatic, but the parrying could be a separate type of attack (IE: a secondary attack) that works only when you're being attacked by someone else and when it's timed correctly. The parry then opens up the enemy's defenses, and from there you have to actuall score regular attack hits. I think this would also help speed up the game.

Maybe the current system could be left for duels (in a tweaked form, that is -- less randomness please), but the other systems used for FFA/CTF/etc.

Not sure if this has been said or not.. there is manual blocking in JKII with console commands. All they do is when you press the button you assign to block, you cannot attack and you use the same ol' auto blocking. Its the same as just leaving auto block on and simply not slashing. I think when people say "manual blocking" they mean "effective blocking that can actually stop a slash or two". JKII's auto blocking couldn't block ****. Your best bet was to dodge the slash all together. I think this is what people want changed in the new saber system.

Auto blocking all the way.

Going along with the comments about internet lag issues, keep in mind that implementing manual blocking adds a complexity to a certain weapon that would surely suffer for it.

Take all these auto blocking ideas. Now let's say I give you a lethal lightsaber, and all of these powers, and then I put you in a room full of gunners. For now they won't use explosive cannons, they'll take their repeaters and blasters, and hop around here and there. Now, please tell me where you would find all of this time to concentrate on pressing manual block while dodging rampant fire and people leaping here and there trying to hit you?

Manual blocking is too complicated. JKII/JK/JKIII are first person shooters, which means that everything is happening at real time, all attacks happen suddenly. There is no time to react to attacks and constantly press a guard button and aim in certain directions. Promod was the best idea when it came to a blocking function. It got rid of a cumbersome "block" button, and simply relied on how well you aimed. Even then, your blocking was not all powerful, but it was a step in the less random direction. I think that's as far as it can and should go.

Basically, manual blocking, if you really think about it, is useless to a FPS game. Why? Well, if you actually bother playing the FULL game (it's amazing how many people insist on playing only a quarter of it, i.e. saberz 0nly, n0 f0rc3 p0w3rz), you'd see that blocking plays an infinitely small role in the game. When I played JK2++, Promod, etc., where my saber was actually a weapon and not a bat, you barely had time to think about who or what you were going to block. Especially in JK2++. If you were a saberist, like me, most of your opponents were gunners, and EVERYONE had force speed 3. Please tell me where that space of time exists where I can sit back and think about pressing the block button, etc? All of my keys are taken up by force powers that I HAVE to use, switch stances at appropriate moments, etc., and and majority of you want to go and complicate things even further. What's worse is that the complication has NO BENEFIT (assuming you actually play the game instead of just half of it).

Even more, we already read the comments saying that gameplay would slow down. This is very true. How am I supposed to enjoy a full game (i.e., we play the whole game, not 25% of it) when half the time I'm plagued with messing around with my manual block key (which I will probably hardly use). When someone else pulls out the lightsaber, suddenly we are both stuck thinking about when and where to push the block button. MEANWHILE, the gunners, who are smart and stick to the less complicated stuff, simply click and shoot, click and shoot, click and shoot, wiping us saber n00bies out in style! One of the keys on my keyboard is completely worn out from both the incessant pressing and tapping of it, sometimes in anger as I scream "stupid block key, block that stuff". It's just a bad idea on all sides. Some of us can't even agree how manual blocking should work. In the end, manual blocking in an fps would simply be a "toggle your auto blocking system" button. It's redundant and doesn't really have a logical place in the game.

Evasion is best. That's what fps is about. The JKII blocking system was MORE than adequate. If you hated the random saber to saber blocking system, get promod. It wasn't random at all, AND it didn't add any cumbersome blocking system either. It was entirely intuitive. I simply had to stand correctly and watch to block reliably, it all came naturally, without effort. A manual block system is NOT INTUITIVE at all. Just my two cents.

Doctor Shaft, I agreed with you all the way up until the last paragraph. Auto or manual blocking aside.. the potency of blocking is scarcly adequate for this game. In SP, (where blocking is the best), the fact still remains that givin the right situation, your enemy's saber will pass through your own saber. It's also true that you CANNOT stand your ground when facing a dark Jedi... Kyle does not extend his saber outward the least bit to stop attacks. The only way to make your idle saber block a slash is to point Kyle's body in a direction so that his stance model will position the idel saber in just the right spot. And if your opponent uses red stance (Desann, for example) his saber will pass through yours no matter what.

The best way to have any kind of defense in JKII is to dodge everything, like you've said in your post. People with guns dodge.. people with force drivin deflection techniques don't dodge. A classic line comes to me about the force.. (ben and luke talking about the force)

"You mean in controls my actions?"
"Partially.. it also obey's your commands."

I understand the value in autoblocking, but my prefered style gets shafted because I simply cannot effectively block a simple incoming slash. There are many things you can do to counter an oncoming slash.. but in JKII.. blocking it isn't one of them.

Originally posted by Solo4114
Ok, so if the guns fire pure energy with no concussive effect, why do they so obviously recoil in the movies? And why do they fire in bolts instead of rays???? HMMMMMM??? Don't have an answer for THAT now DO ya, smart guy? :) (not that it really matters anyway) It's obvious! Star Wars physics :) It's the same reason why there is sound in space...

Originally posted by Solo4114
As for the backing up issue, didn't Raven slow down backup speed relative to the other directions? I thought that was something they did with 1.04 (one of the good things, actually). You know what, you might be right about that. That does ring a bell. I looked in the readmes for the patches and didn't see it though...

Originally posted by Solo4114
As for why manual blocking is better it's precisely because you get more control. It would also require that people LEARN to control that ability rather than just trust the computer. Yes, you can currently score hits on people, but it's fairly random, not tied to aim at all, and you still have no control over it. See, I don't find it completely random. Maybe this is what causes our views (and both camps views) to differ. I find that hits aren't random, at least a server with a low ping. I find that when I attack an opening, I feel I do connect when I should connect. I also feel that with just a mouse and direction keys, I have exceptional control over my lightsaber. I can control what direction I swing, diagionally down or up, straight up or down, spins, special moves. I feel that I can move the saber the way I want it to move. I guess that's also why I don't see the need for manual blocking. I already have lots of control, and adding that would almost be too much to control.

I'm not trying to dump on your ideas, man. On the contrary, you have some interesting and well thought out ideas, even if I don't agree with them all. But at least it makes me think about why I don't want manual blocking :)

Originally posted by ILR
The best way to have any kind of defense in JKII is to dodge everything, like you've said in your post. People with guns dodge.. people with force drivin deflection techniques don't dodge...

I understand the value in autoblocking, but my prefered style gets shafted because I simply cannot effectively block a simple incoming slash. There are many things you can do to counter an oncoming slash.. but in JKII.. blocking it isn't one of them.Man, I don't find this at all, especially in SP. As long as I'm not swing like a fool, I find I can block most swings coming my way. Remember, this has a great reliance on the ping, so if you have a high ping, it won't matter at all. It also depends what stance you are in. You can certainly block many swings that would otherwise mean death :)

I agree mostly with you ILR.

I personally like the manual blocking mostly for use in saber duels. As far as saber vs gun combat, I would like to see an autoblocking system that deflects blaster bolts, but if you hit the block button at the moment of impact, you can definitely aim back at your opponent, like Jedi Power Battles. I do agree that the trouble with manual blocking is where to bind it. The keys that surround WADS are bound to force powerson my keyboard too, but I have a MS explorer with two extra buttons. I also bind push and pull to wheel up and wheel down, respectively. I would bind the block button probably to the the mouse wheel press, and still have room for the other powers.

My biggest draw to this game is the saber duels. My favorite thing to do with JO these days is to play that ladder level that sends Reborn after you. I like the idea of manual blocking b/c it adds a little bit of twitch skill that you have to time right with saber impacts. I think it would give the duels a little more life, and make them feel more like sword fights. This would also make you feel more Jedi-like when delfecting laser bolts. Instead of just standing there, you can actually take action and block those bolts back at the enemy with your twitch skills. Its like you're actually doing the saber manuvers.

Boy this is a heated discussion. It started out with most votes to the manual blocking. Now auto is catching up! In the end I would bet that Raven left the saber combat alone, and only added to the two stances for the light staff, and the dual sabers.

Laser bolts etc. should be blocked automaticly. Blocking sabers would look a lot like in JK2, but in addition to that, you can press a defensive block button, which will block the red stance swings too... But it should be made so that you can't just block forever, that would encourage laming...