Author Topic: Reallistic Combat Model for Native  (Read 248941 times)

Offline Ron Losey

  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 4418
    • View Profile
Re: Reallistic Combat Model for Native
« Reply #375 on: April 03, 2010, 06:21:27 pm »
Yeah, well, the reality IS that good armor and decent weapons do give a huge advantage.  Nobility in the ancient world were noticeably harder to kill, as a result.  Same reason modern SWAT teams take as few casualties as they do.

As for thrown weapons doing more damage when thrown ... there is some of that.  You can put your weight into a throw, because you don't have to recover the weapon afterward.  In contrast, you try to jab someone with a short javelin, not only are you limited by the need to recover the weapon, but it is hardly well balanced for that sort of use.  Also, the simple act of leaving the weapon in the wound is extremely debilitating ... a point of which the Romans made excellent use with their barbed pilum, for historical reference.  Even if the wound is minor, the size and weight of the weapon protruding from your body makes it very hard to do anything but sit down and cry.

Also note that the damage calculations between melee and missile weapons do not directly correspond to each other.  Different melee attacks have different modifiers.

But no doubt the Native numbers are off both ways.

Anyway, yes I knew that the damage types and attacks with various weapons would be completely off.  That seems to be a recurring theme.  Fortunately, that's the easy part to fix.


----------
What I really need is details of the damage calculation.  If someone wants to do this:

Get a weapon of a given damage rating in one of the .90x/1.0x RCM versions, and whack target dummies with every possible attack, and write down the damage numbers.

Repeat using same character stats and same weapon damage numbers in Warband.

Compare.  If they are effectively the same, we're good to go.  If not, try to figure out what has changed.

sdog

  • Guest
Re: Reallistic Combat Model for Native
« Reply #376 on: April 04, 2010, 11:14:34 pm »
Quote
Yeah, well, the reality IS that good armor and decent weapons do give a huge advantage.  Nobility in the ancient world were noticeably harder to kill, as a result.  Same reason modern SWAT teams take as few casualties as they do.

yes, but's probably not entirely desirable for a multiplayer deathmatch. your comparison let's a certain counter terorist vs. terorist mod spring to my mind.
the balance in the multiplayer of warband isn't that bad. the better weapons and armour are still in a range that makes them desirable but not completely unbalancing. their true strength lies mostly in avoiding for most groups a perfect loadout everyone caries. (this the above mentioned game didn't)
the warband factions in multiplayer are clearly modeled after historic 13 century factions. Rhodoks clearly spanish, Saranids generic Saracens fiting the role of Nasrid and Seljuk Sultanates, Vaegir more strongly rus. Only Nords still seem to be a century or two behind, but i suppose there are enough Viking fans out there they couldn't dare to piss off. unlike vanila M&B there are no extreme anachronisms like full plate armour.

rcm would tip the balance to unplayable however, maille would be just too good and cheap. but if it can be modded, providing decent loadouts for the factions shouldn't prove too dificult.
i think in general it should be advisable to improve the lower quality armour quite a bit, and give players some better armour breaking weapons.
(pollaxe!) drawback, this could make archers probably next to useless, except if they're good and deal headshots.

ron, could you please point me to a good M&B 1.0x rcm release? i haven't tried one so far.

Offline Ron Losey

  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 4418
    • View Profile
Re: Reallistic Combat Model for Native
« Reply #377 on: April 05, 2010, 10:21:29 am »
Tragically, the only RCM versions to have made it to 1.0x are this project (the final version of which was not even mine), and the alpha of the fantasy mod project that I started but could not really generate enough interest to get rolling.  All of the major RCM mods are on hold or in early development, hampered by real life constraints of the teams.

And yes, I found also that the Warband mod system is not yet released, at least not in any public distribution.  So obviously that will have to wait until we have it.

Balance is a funny concept.  Something can be well balanced and still be ludicrous (i.e. the D&D type damage/hit point models), or can be somewhat realistic and still severely unbalanced (like a simulation of a SWAT team against street punks).  To make a playable game of a multiplayer M&B RCM mod, it would require setting up the weapon stats, and then balancing the equipment prices and availability until the game was playable.

For example, in RCM mods the arrows may not penetrate extremely heavy armor, but they do a lot more damage ... so it would balance fine if not everybody could afford armor that turned them into a walking tank.  The lighter troops would be slaughtered.  Even if a few did have extreme armor, odds are their horses would not fare as well ... see historical reference to Agincourt, where French heavy cav suddenly ended up as infantry, and things sort of went downhill from there.  The balance often comes in a roundabout way, as it often does in reality ... more of a rock-paper-scissors sort of equation than a simple A = B. 

Same with heavy weapons, or anything else ... RCM was about putting realistic limitations on people and equipment.  This tends to mean that most types of gear tend to have both uses and weaknesses.  That is very much at odds with the typical computer-game mentality that says you need a "good" weapon.  Just because something is high damage doesn't make it "good" (especially if it moves slower than a glacier, and is almost as heavy as one).  And really heavy armor is good protection, but it sure slows you down if you end up on foot - which makes you an easy missile target, and sooner or later one of them will go through the armor, or else somebody will ride by with a huge hammer and flatten you into a pie plate.  That's kind of the way it goes.

This could add to the game, or detract from it, depending on what kind of people were playing and how much thought went into their character build and tactical assessment.

Personally, I have little or no interest in the multiplayer part anyway ... but I'll try to help balance it, if and when we get that far, and if there is demand.  But first things first ... first we need the module system, and to figure out the new system changes.  Then convert the weapons data.  Then, and only then, can we worry about actually building balanced mods for such.

Jean Plassy

  • Guest
Re: Reallistic Combat Model for Native
« Reply #378 on: April 05, 2010, 04:04:36 pm »
Ron,

Yeah, the "gamey" mentality is part of the whole thing. People think that the most expensive must necessarily be the best and so on.

Also, M&B Warband "is not" balanced. It has a couple of patchwork and ludicrous features like Melee FF to make up for extremely overpowered and lightning fast two handers, but that feature itself screws the balance even more and makes fighting in groups less desirable: try it, one of my favourite tactics when surrounded was to spam axe and keep turning and dodging around the weapons around me until someone team killed the other. Actually it's not rare to witness a team of three, two get tk'ed, the other gets killed by the single guy they were facing, sometimes because he was hurt a lot by his friends already.

Now take that feature off, and you'll be seeing entire packs of Glaive touting spammers swinging around widely, 'till your shield breaks and you can't block them because the swings come from multiple directions.

The truth is, if you're in for "balance" alone, then I think RCM is not very suitable for you. The reason why big guns like the M107 and the S&W .500 are not standard issue in the military is because they are bulky, complex, and the S&W .500 has enough recoil and muzzle flash to feed a power plant; big weapons lack versatility, especially for the individualized combat portrayed in M&B.
« Last Edit: April 05, 2010, 04:06:24 pm by Jean Plassy »

Offline Ron Losey

  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 4418
    • View Profile
Re: Reallistic Combat Model for Native
« Reply #379 on: April 05, 2010, 06:51:55 pm »
As for balance ... the reason modern armies don't use the biggest guns they can find is simple - because humans don't normally resist weapons fire well enough to require such, and factors like accuracy and rate of sustainable fire come into play (not to mention weight and bulk of both weapon and ammo).  Same reason the Romans used short swords instead of huge axes (as many of their opponents did) - speed and versatility were more useful than raw damage.  And NOBODY would argue that the Roman Legions were ineffective ... they were like walking into a buzz-saw.

Computer game mentality, however, tends to miss these finer points of reality.  In games, the biggest weapon is almost always the preferred choice ... because in games, the player characters generally tend to be unrealistically hard to stop (like they've been marinating in a mixture of steroids and PCP, at minimum, or sometimes more like only kryptonite can hurt them).  If it were impossible to stop the average person with anything lighter than an RPG, then everybody would need a permit to carry a concealed RPG.  (If you can conceal an RPG, my compliments to your tailor.)

That issue was how the Realistic Combat Model got started in the first place. 

I see no reason that it couldn't be balanced for multi-player, except that it would be easy to assemble a character loadout that would prove ineffective against certain opponents for any number of reasons.  This does not represent a lack of "balance", as much as a lack of planning... but expecting the axe-spam clan to plan out their strategy might be expecting way too much.

Still, I'm relatively sure it would draw a committed following.  The very presence of this thread likely says something about that ... considering that the RCM modification started out as an experiment on ONR, and has largely spread on its own merits.

But this is still a moot point until we have the module system.

sdog

  • Guest
Re: Reallistic Combat Model for Native
« Reply #380 on: April 05, 2010, 09:35:12 pm »
balancing RCM for multiplayer is certainly possible, if loadouts will be modable. at the moment it's only a technical question, since we don't have a modkit so far.

i just wanted to draw attention to two things the necessity of doing so, and that it will take some thought, how to do it properly.

i think there are a few boundary conditions that have to be met if it should be used for MP:
-- more realistic weapon and armour values, as in old RCM
-- no unreasonable loadout combinations/offers
-- no 'killer' weapon, to make other combinations undesirable
-- give archers and cavalry a place on the battlefield (if the players are skilled)
-- provide enough balance to have players addopt it in multiplayer


MB in multiplayer is quite enjoyable. players just have so many more ideas to fight. i got surprised by clever moves everytime i played -- and i'm not talking about game kung-fu.
i think, ron, you probably considered the predictability of AI as something particulary unrealistic.

Offline Ron Losey

  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 4418
    • View Profile
Re: Reallistic Combat Model for Native
« Reply #381 on: April 05, 2010, 11:13:09 pm »
The predictable nature of the AI can be unrealistic.  Then again, I find humans to be pretty predictable too, but in very different ways.  Not specifically in reference to multiplayer games - humans in reality tend to repeat the same stupid mistakes.  They try to reach beyond the point where they are well balanced (some much more than others) and otherwise generally forget to take physics into account, they get tunnel vision focusing on the weapon and forget about the empty hand (theirs or the opponent's), they forget to check their peripheral vision (which is usually how cops get knifed while trying to detain somebody - just under the armpit from the side, before they even knew a knife was involved), and most obviously, they tend to underestimate their opponents.  And that list doesn't include all the multiple-person screw-ups that make seemingly professional troops look like a Keystone Cops routine, or yellow backup not bailing out the point-man (or the inverse, the point-man having more courage than good sense), or a hundred other variations on that theme.

And that list is very realistic.  A lot of men ... a lot of tough warriors, even ... have been cut down and their guts strewn down sidewalks for making one of these mistakes.  And yet tomorrow's newspapers somewhere will have a story of somebody making the same mistake again.  I am still alive because pretty much every time I walked into something, the thugs who tried to take me out were entirely too predictable, or at least could be easily manipulated into making one of those common mistakes.

So realistically, people are pretty stupid and predictable too.  Probably much more so in reality than in a multiplayer game ... because like yourself, they can still think pretty clearly in a game.  This is generally not true when the contents of your bloodstream are about 50% adrenalin, you're alone and out of breath, and someone is trying to turn you into rat food.  Under those conditions, only really hard people can even put out the impression of thinking somewhat clearly, and everybody else becomes even more stupid than the computer AI.  (I know I've made my share of stupid mistakes like that, and I was just lucky that my opponents made even more clueless mistakes, and so failed to capitalize upon my errors.)

It's probably good that we can't simulate that influence.


-------------------------
Now, on that list of requirements:

One, yeah, the values will have to work.  That's step one - make the values historically and physically accurate.  Reality is realistically balanced, but using that requires that reality be simulated accurately.

Two - unreasonable loadouts ... depends on what you call unreasonable.  History is full of people putting together utterly absurd weapons packages, and occasionally it paid off.  Usually it did not ...  If the numbers are correct, then this reality will be reflected in the game - "reasonable" will quickly be determined by what is likely to work.

Three - the "killer weapon" ... reality is more of a rock-paper-scissors kind of game.  Weapon/armor combo A will work against B but not C.  There will probably be many possible loadouts that would make another combo undesirable, but unless you know what your enemy is using ahead of time, it's still a gamble.

Four, obviously ...

Five ... what particular players will or will not adopt depends on the players.  As I said previously, I am sure it would have a following.  How many?  No way to know ... I have no idea how many play the game in the first place.

But still, it is moot until we have the module system.  And until all of the data is collected so a conversion can be made.

mounted_warrior

  • Guest
Re: Reallistic Combat Model for Native
« Reply #382 on: April 07, 2010, 06:40:48 am »
to: Ron Losey

not sure if this is the right place for my request, but i'm going to give it a shot.
i simply love "the wedding dance" mod for m&b. but i hate the combat system it uses.
i found a tweaked version of RCM which i like a lot, but i have no idea how to integrate it in TWD.
here it is: http://www.mbrepository.com/file.php?id=1540

if you could help me by pointing me in the right direction i'd be grateful.

also see here: http://s9.zetaboards.com/exilian/single/?p=8015844&t=7177828

thanks.

Offline Ron Losey

  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 4418
    • View Profile
Re: Reallistic Combat Model for Native
« Reply #383 on: April 07, 2010, 04:05:52 pm »
Short answer - you need the module system for the mod in question.  Then you have to type in all of the new weapon values.  (If most are the same as Native, you can copy many of them.  Any new items need unique stats.)

If you can get that far, I can advise on any items that need said unique stats.

Also note that this will greatly change balance ... it's usually better to also edit troop data to reflect the new numbers.  Best if the team who made the mod in the first place are on-board for the conversion.

mounted_warrior

  • Guest
Re: Reallistic Combat Model for Native
« Reply #384 on: April 08, 2010, 12:58:46 am »
thanks for the timely reply.

i tried modifying the horse values in the text files, but i saw no change in the game - horses are still slow.
so yes, i would need the module system for the mod, but the author did not yet reply to my request.
if this changes i'll let you know.

dude, you rock. cheers.

Offline Conners

  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 533
    • View Profile
Re: Reallistic Combat Model for Native
« Reply #385 on: April 17, 2010, 05:36:33 am »
I have a bit of spare time, so I'll give it a try, with 1.011 Native, and the most recent version of Warband. Hope I can work out something useful for you, with hitting the combat dummies.

EDIT: Sorry, but, where do I find combat dummies? Do I just keep repeating that part of the tutorial that asks you to kill four combat dummies? Won't be able to do much with my stats, in that part of the game. Don't know what weapon stats are used for that sword either.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2010, 05:51:57 am by Conners »

Offline Shik

  • Craftsman
  • **
  • Posts: 88
    • View Profile
Re: Reallistic Combat Model for Native
« Reply #386 on: April 17, 2010, 08:17:39 am »
You can place combat dummies in a scene using the in-game edit mode (enable edit mode in the configuration menu, then press ctrl + e to start edit mode and press alt + enter to set it in windowed mode.) This would be the easiest and fastest way.
Alternatively, you can search some of the castles. I think some of the nord and vaegir castles have combat dummies lying around.

Offline Conners

  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 533
    • View Profile
Re: Reallistic Combat Model for Native
« Reply #387 on: April 17, 2010, 08:22:34 am »
OK, thanks.

Offline Conners

  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 533
    • View Profile
Re: Reallistic Combat Model for Native
« Reply #388 on: April 17, 2010, 09:34:24 am »
OK, I've finished my first test:


---Mount and Blade 1.011---

   Character
STR: 7   AGI: 11   Power Strike: 0   One-Handed Prof: 66

Weapon: Nordic Sword, Swing 28c, Thrust 20p, Speed Rating 99, Weapon Reach 94, Weight 1.5.

Speed Rating -/+0
Full Verticle Swing: 37
Quick Verticle Swing: 29
Full Left Swing: 35
Quick Left Swing: 28
Full Right Swing: 35
Quick Right Swing: 28
Full Thrust: 26
Quick Thrust: 20

Speed Rating +37%
Full Side Swing: 48

Speed Rating +16%
Full Verticle Swing: 43

+41%
Quick Side Swing: 39

+48%
Full Thrust: 37

From this, it seems Mount and Blade 1.011 is exact dame without randomness, and speed ratings are exact multipliers. Though you'll already know that. Not sure what difference weight makes, or proficiency.


Now let's try the same in Warband.


---Mount and Blade 1.105---

   Character
STR: 7   AGI: 11   Power Strike: 0   One-Handed Prof: 65

Weapon: Nordic Sword, Swing 28c, Thrust 20p, Speed Rating 99, Weapon Reach 94, Weight 1.5.


OK... This is where it gets weird. Now, it seems, Speed Ratings don't show up, at all, while fighting dummies, at least. Yep, it works normally for normal soldiers. So, testing this.... is going to be HELL, I'm sorry to report. I'm not sure what to do to help test it.

However, I can report that randomness has been added for the attacks. I pretty well replicated my verticle swings exactly, for ages. But for no apparent reason, the damage would vary.

It went from 37, to 33. Hitting several targets, in different places. Full Verticle Swings, standing still.

I added one point of Power Strike, to see what difference it made:
I was now doing anything from 40 damage to 35, doing the same thing.

That's enough for one experiment. Hope it helps you, Ron.

Offline Ron Losey

  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 4418
    • View Profile
Re: Reallistic Combat Model for Native
« Reply #389 on: April 17, 2010, 05:12:42 pm »
Oh, crud.  I guess this means I'll have to get the formula directly from the developers.

If there is ever a module system for warband.