Sorry buddy, but years of Ren-Fairing and SCA-ing have taught me that MO2's speed is much closer to the real thing, than MO1. What is your experience to claim "Combat irl is very very very much faster" please.
Last edited:
Beta Patch Notes 0.1.0.4
- Thread starter Necromantic
- Start date
Idno, i don't think any dev is gunna sift through pages of individuals throwing mud at each other over their beliefs of how fast a sword should swing, and end up drawing a game changing conclusion from it.
Sounds like nonsensical bitching to me.
The devs have all the data in the world to draw conclusions from their changes.
Besides, i'm a firm believer that the devs have a much broader perspective of the game they are trying to make, than the players paying to test it have.
Please I never said it needed to be realistic. Just quasi believable instead of the ice skating shit we had in MO1.
I actually prefer the speedpatch even though it feels like a cartoon. Players will be slower to start with low skills anyways with beta.
Last edited:
chuckle, I'll bite; what's it supposed to be, according to you? Feel free to leave out the sarcasm, I'm actually curious.
It's a video game.
The game does not market itself as a simulation / simulator. It does not market itself on being historically accurate.
It might reference taking inspiration from our Earth in ideas that are varied across the board, but no where does it flat out state that the combat of the game is meant to accurately represent how melee combat works in real life and or how it was conducted.
The most it ever does is tug at strings which implies elements of realism such as "numbers may be a deciding factor" or that "whilst in the world you are subject to any attack, anywhere". It doesn't ever flat out say "The game seeks to replicate combat realism." A game that tried to do that was Kingdom Come Deliverance - and while I love the game, the combat was very clunky and not that fun to be quite honest.
If your argument for a good combat system is to mimic realistic melee combat, then by all means begin looking for a different game. Because you wont get it here. Want to know why? Because there is magic. Magic is intertwined into the game whether you like it or not, and it's main purpose will be for combat. What about bandages? Bandaging during a fight multiple times to heal isn't realistic, that takes part in combat too.. Unless you want to strawman and argue "well i fell down a cliff and bandaged myself that isnt combat!" well then how do you recover "well being" if you were drowning by using a bandage. That isn't realistic.
What about potions? Potions are inherently magical because through alchemy you sometimes use reagents and gatherables that have magical properties which amplify the substance used.
It's not what is according to me, it's what is according to Mortal Online. Do they incorporate realism-like elements? Sure. Should the combat follow 100% being realistically accurate? No. That's going to make for an even more clunky, unfun game. Good game mechanics and balance create good combat, as long as the core / foundation of it works.
The problem with it now is it is slow. I GET that there are other issues with the game, but making it slower isn't going to promote longevity in the game. Whether you like to believe it or not, the end game for MO will always be PvP. Sure, you can have guilds / groups / individuals who TRY their hardest to steer clear of it but you will always be subjected to it no matter who you are, where you are, or what you're doing.
Realism is such a pointless debate when it comes to combat, even if it makes sense. I'll provide an example
Mounted combatants in MO1 were super strong. They had extremely high damage mitigation due to being highly mobile, tanky due to armor, potions, and bandages. They were glass cannons without the glass. A smart MC could decimate a group of people - anyone who brings up that stupid argument of "well ackshually u just shoot them with a bow or earthquake them!!" funny thing is, a smart MC avoids this kind of shit.
... and guess what? A smart MC isn't a smart player, being smart at MC took little to no effort. Why do you think in MO1 people funneled so much time and money into their mounted combatant characters? Because it's WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY easier and more rewarding with way less risk when you can hit someone for 60-80 and ride away when in danger. Foot fighter? You get to kite away, good luck in heavy armor cause stamina is against you. Oh, and if a mounted is on you as a foot player along; you're just fucked.
You could equally invest time, money, and skill points into purely combat related / focused skills, with one being mounted and the other on foot and the mounted wouldn't have to try nearly as hard as the foot to survive, good luck securing a kill on a mounted as a foot player. Cause in MO1 it was nearly impossible outside of very niche, not optimal ways such as triple strike (Fist weapons).
This comes full circle to the slow combat, it's promoting not-so skill based gameplay but giving it to a broader audience. A lot of people I've noticed praising the combat aren't even people who want to play with the melee in the first place. They literally talk about making mounteds, mages, pet-users, etc. Because they know the system is fucking crap and don't want foot fighters to have any kind of chance on release. At least, It feels like that with the way some of you literally can only churn out insult, after insult, after insult when people who have much more experience then a lot of people against it are most of the time right in their observations, reasonings, and wants for the combat to be fast.
The slow combat isn't fun, it heavily encourages the ideas of gear crutching and using numbers to swarm / zerg to overcome skill; because the system crutches mechanically bad players.
I don't want super desynced, laggy fighting either; but I also don't want slowed down combat to where everyone is capable of the melee when it's clearly a system crutch then the player being good from a mechanical stand point.
1. Realism
When people talk realism in any fictitious setting what they are talking about is the concept of suspension of disbelief. What this means in a fictional work is within the known fictional game world rules & laws of physics, how believable is what is happening on screen. The more detached from the explained or implied laws of nature of said game world, the more difficult it is for the player to suspect their disbelief and therefore maintain engagement with the game. In this instance the latency related challenging, prediction exploitation and other movements and actions that create a huge disconnect from what they see or expect is possible within the game work is what detaches them from the system or game as a whole.
If you read the complaints, almost none of them are even about the difficulty of any prior iteration of combat; it's mostly down to the issues mentioned exceeding their capacity to suspend disbelief. This is not limited to melee combat either; horrendous AI and pathfinding was huge in this respect and drove a ton of people AWAY from taming is another notable issue.
Ultimately the game world sets this tone and implies what the game world laws of physics are in the environment and what actors are capable of.
2. PVP Combat being the only end-game to strive for
Everyone has their own reasons for playing and their own goals. It's a sandbox with pvp. The reason some may think this is due to them only deriving fun from pvp. For plenty of other players their end game might be mastering any number of the non combat systems, politics, socializing. You might see every game system existing to support pvp, others may see pvp existing to support the economic or political end-game. It's a little naïve to view one single element of a sandbox game as the only reason to play and only thing to aim for.
The people you deride for having a different reason for playing the game, or bad players as you term them, simply immerse themselves in the sandbox for a different reason and have a different view of what type of game mechanics or issues are acceptable.
TL;DR: 'It's a game' is not an argument, everyone has their own reason for playing and tolerance for the unbelievable.
Back to the topic of patch notes:
I jumped in to test the material system and was a little disappointed. Based on discord discussions and comments made in streams I was under the impression that with the restrictions on gear slots and weapon combo's would come more visual customizations using material types on gear, but it seems like armor only recognizes the primary material once again, and the weapon is also limited to showing the handle and head material. I saw someone's screenshot of a scale helmet which had a steel visor which is obviously not coded to material change.
This type of restricted system really tests my ability to suspend disbelief and should be a relic of technology past.
When people talk realism in any fictitious setting what they are talking about is the concept of suspension of disbelief. What this means in a fictional work is within the known fictional game world rules & laws of physics, how believable is what is happening on screen. The more detached from the explained or implied laws of nature of said game world, the more difficult it is for the player to suspect their disbelief and therefore maintain engagement with the game. In this instance the latency related challenging, prediction exploitation and other movements and actions that create a huge disconnect from what they see or expect is possible within the game work is what detaches them from the system or game as a whole.
If you read the complaints, almost none of them are even about the difficulty of any prior iteration of combat; it's mostly down to the issues mentioned exceeding their capacity to suspend disbelief. This is not limited to melee combat either; horrendous AI and pathfinding was huge in this respect and drove a ton of people AWAY from taming is another notable issue.
Ultimately the game world sets this tone and implies what the game world laws of physics are in the environment and what actors are capable of.
2. PVP Combat being the only end-game to strive for
Everyone has their own reasons for playing and their own goals. It's a sandbox with pvp. The reason some may think this is due to them only deriving fun from pvp. For plenty of other players their end game might be mastering any number of the non combat systems, politics, socializing. You might see every game system existing to support pvp, others may see pvp existing to support the economic or political end-game. It's a little naïve to view one single element of a sandbox game as the only reason to play and only thing to aim for.
The people you deride for having a different reason for playing the game, or bad players as you term them, simply immerse themselves in the sandbox for a different reason and have a different view of what type of game mechanics or issues are acceptable.
TL;DR: 'It's a game' is not an argument, everyone has their own reason for playing and tolerance for the unbelievable.
Back to the topic of patch notes:
I jumped in to test the material system and was a little disappointed. Based on discord discussions and comments made in streams I was under the impression that with the restrictions on gear slots and weapon combo's would come more visual customizations using material types on gear, but it seems like armor only recognizes the primary material once again, and the weapon is also limited to showing the handle and head material. I saw someone's screenshot of a scale helmet which had a steel visor which is obviously not coded to material change.
This type of restricted system really tests my ability to suspend disbelief and should be a relic of technology past.
you pour out a lot of text in each topic and no specifics, one water and philosophy ... sorry ..
If reading and writing English is too hard then don't bother, not sure what to say but I re-read most of the things I put out to make sure they flow well.
Combat is almost entirely impossible to avoid because it is forced on players, making PvP the be all end all no matter how you stretch it. You make gear to fight things with, and eventually someone will fight you with the gear you made.
You know what's funny about MO? You couldn't play it without PvP'ing, but you could definitely play it without PvE'ing, why is that? Oh - because the game literally revolves around it.
Does that mean people of varying playstyles can not exist and or coexist within that same sphere? Of course not, people did it. Doesn't mean that they weren't effected by it though.
Hate to say it, but MO wouldn't be MO without PvP. MO could probably survive as a game if it was PvP only to some extent - granted things would change like it changing from an MMO to some kind of deathmatch / instanced game. (Think Mortal Royale, but not shit / buggy). But I don't think people would pick up MO just for the PvE aspects of it. (All of this is based of MO1 of course, MO2 is incomplete / unfinished and it would be hard to predict)
Players can have individual end games, but as a collective and part of the community; PvP / conflict whether politically or personally driven is the end game. Game doesn't have conflict? Game doesn't have activity. MO1 is a prime example of that. Game dies in pop when no conflict happens.
It's a reason why I am so hard pressed in disallowing the political state of the game to drift back into a two sided zerg fest war, if it means me and my guild needs to get zerged by two sides; so be it. But we will always be the third party to any situation.
Also, let me draw on some other things you stated. Someone in MO1 could of been terrible at PvP with the melee combat, but would of been just fine using it in PvE. Since all you needed to do was parry / hit for most things. That's not at all difficult. Obviously harder things required more specialized characters like mounteds or mages with pets, but it honestly got even easier than parry / hit - just sick a pet on something and heal it or fill something with arrows.
The reason I express the combat doesn't need to be easily picked up from a PvP perspective on such a broad spectrum is so that players who spend the time in it can show the time invested, just like people who delve into crafting or PvE related stuff and they too can show their time sinks in other ways.
Kind of shit when you can pour hundreds of hours into the now current combat and nothing really changes in your playstyle other then, get this, making the game look / play worse. Notice how people reference MO1 combat looking bad? Do you see what ""good"" players on MO2 do? They spin, spaz, and break animations with jumping and flicking their mouses around to attempt to get in one hit out of the thirty they throw out to get damage in.
I know some people would jump in and say "what about mah turncaps, that would stop it!" but that only adds onto reducing the skill gap and making the combat feel much slower and worse.
There's a fine difference in the combat being fast, and sometimes reactions have to be everything rather then right now where you can basically trade ripostes back-to-back because it's so telegraphed.
Thats as far from RL swordfighting or fighting in general as a game tbh. Reenactments, etc are not how wars/battles/duels/skirmishes was fought. Real ones involved blood, gore, fear, shit, mud, piss, sweat, tears and a plethora of quick wild spammy swings of your weapons.
You know years of fighting have taught me that all fake combat is well fake and not to be taken as anything other than fake shit, like Hollywood combat. Looks very good and looks like they are actual fighters but damn its so fake its not even funny.
Thats players like you, posting as if your experts but once more knowledgable players rip it apart the veil breaks down real fast. EVERY SINGLE TIME! And still it seems SV takes advice from them over and over while the games combats integrity is ruined because of it.
Yes realism dont make a fun game. Realism can enhance your immersion.
Look up my posts on combat and you will find all the easy to introduce changes possible to make the combat more skill based in them. Repeating myself over and over due to having to fight bad players who dont know much about the combat system is tiresome so it often changes into some minor personal shit throwing. One things for sure though, I am possibly the player who brings up past iterations of the games combat the most.
I know they managed it once so they can again, but due to crybabies we are going to other direction and further ruin the game and the original vision of the game.
My point here is that its the players who views combat as the end game who should be the ones to mold it the most from the players. A non PvPer dont care much for the combat but does have a bias to make it as easy and slow as possible to not easily die to "PvP junkies" every time the player meets them.
If a PvE player molds combat its gonna be bad for PvPers, a banker, a hunter, a politician, etcetcetc all gonna scew combat in a direction away from being fun and competitive for PvPers. Thats from over 10 years of data collection from MO, who suffered the same way MO2 is currently doing, thats a trend I want to break apart.
MO2 is not going to become MO, its heading there very quickly but I will fight it as good as I can until I get banned for speaking the truth regarding the game.
You know there are players here now, that wants MO2 to become like MO since they actually liked it. But my view is that the game died a slow painful death because of the changes made to it. Same changes thats creeping into MO2 by the very fucking same people. That makes blood boil.
I have never said non PvPers dont belong in MO or MO2, I say we need as many of them as possible BUT NOT AT THE EXPENCE OF COMBAT. They are not the ones to listen to combat changes. You should build the systems they gonna play.
Likewise never listen to a PvPer who hate farming and crafting about crafting and farming balance or changes. Asking non "valid experts" is asking for failure.
HYM, Badman, you need to re-read Skydancers post. I was going to write one, and then read his/hers, and realized someone had already written my response for me. Thanks Skydancer; a most excellent explanation. And I'm sick of arguing with people who just love to argue for arguments sake. Your "win by any means at any cost" crap screwed up MO1, and it's screwing up this thread. If unbelievable combat full of exploits is what you still want, you two should go find a different game, or go back to MO1 and enjoy it's death rattle.
Most of both your arguments center around making up crap no one was actually talking about, then arguing against it. It's called a "strawman argument", and it's just dishonest and manipulative, and you should really just stop.
Most of both your arguments center around making up crap no one was actually talking about, then arguing against it. It's called a "strawman argument", and it's just dishonest and manipulative, and you should really just stop.
You mean spinning the camera around to exploit a loophole in the hilt hits detection system for full damage, being able to hit and block behind you, and exploiting the hit detection by stabbing the ground and walls to increase your attack speed as if you landed a nice meaty hit ruins suspension of disbelief and is bad for the game?
Attachments
this message proves once again what kind of person you are =) are you trying to offend me pointing out that I don’t know English? )) this is an act of a low person
don't worry my friend the meaning of your text I understand completely
ps sorry for offtop