Page 1 of 8

Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 14th, 2012, 11:39 am
by Lucius
Will combat use an action point system or be more phase based with a movement turn and action turn? Either way, can you share some details on how the choosen system will play? For example turn order etc.

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 18th, 2012, 10:04 am
by RangerKeenan
Hi Lucius,

Combat will be action point based. There are no defined rounds for "rangers turn" and "enemies turn". Instead it is based on the speed attribute of each party member. Characters with higher speed attributes will get more turns than those with lower speed attributes. Put more points into speed if you'd like to attack more in any given combat encounter.

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 18th, 2012, 10:56 am
by SniperHF
DarkTwinkie wrote:Hi Lucius,

Combat will be action point based. There are no defined rounds for "rangers turn" and "enemies turn". Instead it is based on the speed attribute of each party member. Characters with higher speed attributes will get more turns than those with lower speed attributes. Put more points into speed if you'd like to attack more in any given combat encounter.
Kind of a follow up, is speed limited or constrained by attack type/equipment? Or only through the filter of AP does a combatant get more or less moves/actions?

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 18th, 2012, 12:16 pm
by dorkboy
action points are so nice!
makes me wonder how they will be determined, though, if speed is already used for sequence.. speed for both, or coordination for APs?

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 18th, 2012, 12:28 pm
by undecaf
dorkboy wrote:action points are so nice!
makes me wonder how they will be determined, though, if speed is already used for sequence.. speed for both, or coordination for APs?
Action points might come out of Coordination. It would feel - to me - like Speed getting a bit overbuffed if it determined both how much and how often you can act. That was a bit of a problem with Fallout's Agility already. I may be missing something crucial here, though, it's late.

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 18th, 2012, 12:53 pm
by McDougle
Uhhhhhh... sounds a tad like Shadowruns "Initiative passes" mechanic... Ill have my street samurai with 4 IP. :D

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 18th, 2012, 12:59 pm
by Ronin73
Does this system still allow me to rip an entire clip of ammo, like the original?

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 18th, 2012, 2:26 pm
by dorkboy
undecaf wrote:
dorkboy wrote:action points are so nice!
makes me wonder how they will be determined, though, if speed is already used for sequence.. speed for both, or coordination for APs?
Action points might come out of Coordination. It would feel - to me - like Speed getting a bit overbuffed if it determined both how much and how often you can act. That was a bit of a problem with Fallout's Agility already. I may be missing something crucial here, though, it's late.
yeah, not to mention that agility was important for weapon skills. so if coordination is important for weapon skills (% to hit), then i suppose speed for both AP/sequence is less overpowered.. :?

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 18th, 2012, 7:08 pm
by Woolfe
dorkboy wrote:
undecaf wrote:
dorkboy wrote:action points are so nice!
makes me wonder how they will be determined, though, if speed is already used for sequence.. speed for both, or coordination for APs?
Action points might come out of Coordination. It would feel - to me - like Speed getting a bit overbuffed if it determined both how much and how often you can act. That was a bit of a problem with Fallout's Agility already. I may be missing something crucial here, though, it's late.
yeah, not to mention that agility was important for weapon skills. so if coordination is important for weapon skills (% to hit), then i suppose speed for both AP/sequence is less overpowered.. :?
I'd try and make it reliant on several factors.

Speed - Of course, because it defines how actually quick you are.
Coordination - Becuase it defines how accurate you are at doing what you are doing
Strength - Because it defines how much of an effect that weight of something might affect you

I'd also probably throw in some skill elements A high weapon skill in a particular weapon, might give you a bit of a bonus for example.

It'll be interesting to see how it works in the end. I am sure some stats will end up being a bit out of whack.

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 18th, 2012, 8:42 pm
by Drool
DarkTwinkie wrote:Combat will be action point based. There are no defined rounds for "rangers turn" and "enemies turn". Instead it is based on the speed attribute of each party member.
Please go play Fallout up to the Regulator fight in Adytum. And then please make sure combat in WL2 isn't that long, dragged out, slow, boring, and eye-bleedingly awful.

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 18th, 2012, 8:52 pm
by Arcanix
Drool , i agree with you. Turnbased is dragged out, slow, boring, and eye-bleedingly awful. What to do about it? :lol:

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 18th, 2012, 8:53 pm
by Drool
Arcanix wrote:What to do about it?
Simultaneous phase-based combat.

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 18th, 2012, 9:01 pm
by Woolfe
I am so happy its turn based.

I would have been happy with Simultaneous phase based.

But I really enjoy the AP based turns. And I think your concerns about how long it can take, are definately valid Drool. Altho I personally never found it too onerous, but anytime I had the opportunity, I always made the "computer's" turn as fast as possible without actually skipping it. And having a quick button or slide that speeds/slows the process whilst in game "should" make long fights a bit quicker, but allow you the control to not miss anything in an important fight. (A replay turn option also helps, so if you missed someones movement, you can replay it)

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 18th, 2012, 9:57 pm
by Drool
As long as it doesn't drag like that Adytum fight did. Perhaps it's partially because you only controlled one person in the fight, but it took freaking forever, because you had a dozen or so Regulators and a dozen civilians (and potentially also a dozen or so Blades). Waiting for all those people to take their turn (some of which you couldn't even see because of fog of war/screen size) was tedious and just awful.

I'm just trying to imagine that optional fight at the Mushroom Cloud temple where you had 90-some temple guardians...

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 18th, 2012, 10:46 pm
by Woolfe
Drool wrote:As long as it doesn't drag like that Adytum fight did. Perhaps it's partially because you only controlled one person in the fight, but it took freaking forever, because you had a dozen or so Regulators and a dozen civilians (and potentially also a dozen or so Blades). Waiting for all those people to take their turn (some of which you couldn't even see because of fog of war/screen size) was tedious and just awful.

I'm just trying to imagine that optional fight at the Mushroom Cloud temple where you had 90-some temple guardians...
Yeah agreed, but hopefully it won't be as silly as waiting for players that you can't see. I really hate that too. That sort of thing was lazy programing/unintended consequences from the few dev comments I have read about it.
These sort of things should be massaged out programatically.

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 19th, 2012, 5:27 am
by Wile
If I recall correctly, didn't they say somewhere that enemies would take their turns simultaneously while you would move your characters individually? So I don't think one combat against 30 enemies to would take one month. Atleast not if I am correct.

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 19th, 2012, 6:10 am
by Lucius
Action points won't be bad if it's one action per point. If I have 22 action points and moving takes 1 action per square and firing takes 4 action points, reloading takes 2 action points, changing weapons takes 3 action points, etc, this would suck. I don't want to do math for 4-7 characters every combat round. This would be entirely too convoluted.

If characters typically have 3-5 action points however, would be much more manageable. A typical character with 3 action points could then fire twice and move into cover for example. Or this character could reload, fire once, then step into cover. Some actions I can understand taking more points. For example using field medic can understandably take 2-3 points. Firing a LAW rocket should take 2-3 points. I just don't want overly inflated action points where every character has 10+ action points to spend and every action takes a different number of points. This would be simplified from earlier generations but in this case I think it would be a good thing.

Please consider 1 action per point mechanics.

Edit: This also makes speed not as overpowered giving both action points and turn order. For example if stats max out at 15, all characters have a base of 3 action points. There can then be two thresholds where you gain another action point. Maybe at 6 SPD you have 4 pts and at 12 or higher you have 5. Having more than 6 or more than 12 still has the added benefit of having a higher initiative score and can attack earlier in a combat round. If the system is inflated and every point in speed equals 1 or 2 more action points plus combat initiative it becomes extremely overpowered, imo.

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 19th, 2012, 6:34 am
by dorkboy
Wile wrote:If I recall correctly, didn't they say somewhere that enemies would take their turns simultaneously while you would move your characters individually? So I don't think one combat against 30 enemies to would take one month. Atleast not if I am correct.
yeah, i remember something to that effect, too. can't remember where i read it, though. :?
at any rate, i'm pretty sure this issue has been adressed at some point.

@Lucius
the problem with lowering action points is that you'll be able to move less per turn, making any kind of maneuvering a long term project (unless, of course, movement/AP is increased so that melee at some point becomes possible).
waiting in line to just fire 1 shot/perform 1 action (over and over again) is what makes turn-based boring, imo.

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 19th, 2012, 6:51 am
by undecaf
Wile wrote:If I recall correctly, didn't they say somewhere that enemies would take their turns simultaneously while you would move your characters individually? So I don't think one combat against 30 enemies to would take one month. Atleast not if I am correct.
I seem to remember something to that effect too. But I do hope they won't go that way, though. There's a concern that the combat situations get really messy and unclear (which is the polar opposite of what TB combat should strive for - imo) if you try to keep up with the actions of 5-10 (or more) opponents simultaneously, and more so if those opponents happen to be at different sides of of the screen. Unless of course the the remaining hitpoints is all one cares about, but if that's the case I also remember that there will be some sort of "autocombat" option - IIRC.

EDIT - I think, if my memory doesn't fail, the notion that NPC's move simultaneously during combat was about idle/neutral characters, and not about enemies. Could be wrong, but that's what I [almost] recall now.
dorkboy wrote: the problem with lowering action points is that you'll be able to move less per turn, making any kind of maneuvering a long term project (unless, of course, movement/AP is increased so that melee at some point becomes possible).
waiting in line to just fire 1 shot/perform 1 action (over and over again) is what makes turn-based boring, imo.
Agreed.

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Posted: December 19th, 2012, 7:02 am
by Brother None
dorkboy wrote:the problem with lowering action points is that you'll be able to move less per turn, making any kind of maneuvering a long term project (unless, of course, movement/AP is increased so that melee at some point becomes possible).
waiting in line to just fire 1 shot/perform 1 action (over and over again) is what makes turn-based boring, imo.
Another problem, a rather big one, is that one action = one point thinking basically equates the importance of every action even though they're fundamentally different. Reloading should not cost as much "effort" as moving one square, nor does firing equate those two. Hell, even better, you can help balance out gun use by using action points in a detailed manner. Sure, it asks a little more off the player, but it also delivers a more balanced, more satisfying experience.