» Fri Jul 09, 2010 9:58 pm
Some thoughts on combat:
Maybe provide different stances. Now I'm going to reference a game some of you may have played called Shadowbane. Before you ambush me outside the bar at night let me make it clear that I am only using this as an example and in no way am I saying the Bethesda should copy another game, particularly one that was shut down.
Moving on...
There were three types of combat stances commonly available. These were offensive, defensive, precise, and of course neutral. Using offensive increased your attack speed and made you hit harder. Defensive made you harder to hit, but decreased your damage. Precise slowed your attacks, but made your attacks more accurate. With this you would use Defensive to counter an Offensive stance, Precise to counter a Defensive stance, and Offensive to destroy a Precise stance.
How would a system used in an auto-attack game be implemented in a... let's call it "interactive" game?
Perhaps an offensive stance would leave you more ready to swing, increasing the weapon's damage rating and the speed of which you make the action. On the other hand, you are leaving your body open with the stance, make the time between pressing the block button and the block itself longer than normal. Perhaps your blocks will be more clumsy as well, resulting in frequent staggers and loss of balance.
A defensive stance would put your weapon right in front of you, covering your body. The time it would take to block would be sped up, but you would be unable to draw back for a powerful attack. Perhaps it would simply take longer. Maybe in this stance, you would be in a more defensive mindset, allowing you to maneuver better in your armor, and perhaps skillfully parry attacks rather than clumsily blocking them, thus throwing your opponent off balance.
A precise stance could provide a bonus to your weapon skills, while giving a slight decrease to damage and defensive capability. Maybe it could, however, provide the chance to land a critical strike as well.
Again, this is an example to get the idea across. I'm sure Bethesda devs can come up with something much more imaginative. Ultimately I would like for combat to evolve to a point where the player's skill alone dictates combat skill. Given current technology and how complicated Medieval style combat really is, I won't be holding my breath for it to be that way in TES 5.
Last time I posted in this thread I mentioned armor variation (scaled, lamellar, brigandine, layered, etc. to go along with materials). Another thing from Shadowbane (Still just an example!) was the use of armor rating. Surprisingly, the heaviest plate armors provided even less armor rating than sturdy cloth types. The reason? Armor rating dictated your ability to AVOID damage, rather than ABSORB it. This I could do without seeing in TES, as it would be a step back in the direction of constant misses. Though I loved Morrowind immensely, I will admit Oblivion's combat was better to me, though far from perfect.
So why do I bring this up? Damage absorption was governed by resistances. Plate armor had a lower rating, but had superior resistance. So while you may not be able to dodge that swing, you can still take it. Resistances were to blunt, slashing, and piercing damage, and varied by armor type. Perhaps in TES 5, armor could have the same. Imagine you are accosted by a man in heavy armor. Your broadsword is made for slashing, but that's okay, because you brought a tapered weapon for piercing as well. A system implemented correctly would encourage more weapon variety. Instead of relying only on the best weapon you can find, maybe you will come upon a situation where you really would have to scramble for that fallen mace or axe or dagger to get the upper hand.
Locational damage would be a must. While I babble about armor, I can get into application of it and locational damage. Armor doesn't always cover every part of the body. A sturdy suit of plate often left the arm pits and parts of joints exposed. A well aimed stab to the opponent's sword arm could force him to yield, ending the fight. I admit that providing weak spots for every piece of armor can be hard work from a developer's point of view, given the fact that the player would need a lot more control of their weapon to use it correctly. So let's just put this one on the distant wish list.
None of these would make or break the game. They're just ideas, after all. Al in all I think Bethesda is pretty capable of providing solid combat, with or without little gimmicks such as stances and resistances.