This. This is Minecraft, not Skyrim. I'd suggest that people who feel the need to turn this game into something it's not, please go play a different game.
>Implying anybody said anything about Skyrim.
>Implying Minecraft has to be static.
>Implying people can't have opposing opinions.
You can already choose how you want to fight. You can choose to play a different game.
That's a poor comeback.
You have a sword, or a bow and a flint/steel. That's it. Man really I have so many options to choose from to fight things. They should just keep the system exactly the same, because I'm afraid to add options.herp derp.
I expect a non-retarded explanation why a game can't have more than one genre.
I'll give you a very good one. When a game comes out that tries to cross multiple genres, several things are likely to happen:
First, People who like one of the genres, but not another, will dislike the game, or get annoyed/bored with it quickly, because it incorporates too much of the part they don't like.
Second, the game would suffer from a "jack of all trades, master of none" syndrome. Using minecraft as an example, combat will never be as refined, advanced, and complex as it is in something like Skyrim, no matter how much they add to it. And likewise, if the devs tried to focus on attempting to achieve that impossible goal within the confines of the game, the creative/sandbox portion would suffer as a consequence.
The new "Zombies can break doors" feature is a good example. People wanted the game to be "harder" so they are starting to add things in an attempt to increase the difficulty. In reality (as fun an idea as the door-breaking is), it really doesn't add anything to the difficulty, and actually detracts from creativity (as you can't use wooden doors anymore in your structures, if you don't want zombies in your house).
>Implying anybody said anything about Skyrim.
>Implying Minecraft has to be static.
>Implying people can't have opposing opinions.
> Not understanding the concept of an example.
> Not understanding that there's a difference between a dynamic game and a game potentially suffering from an identity crisis.
> Not understanding that having an opinion of my own is different from implying people can't have opposing opinions.
It just could be better with options. I don't even see why there needs to be a specific advantage that one weapon needs to have over another one. Plenty of successful games have many similar weapons and it becomes a matter of personal taste which one they do even when they are just a reskinned version.
I don't understand the complaint that everything has to be super unique. Why complain that something doesn't have 15 different unique uses to it? Variety is a good thing and Minecraft needs more of it.
I've already stated that I found critical issues with the armor tiers, but the weapon tiers are needed. Minecraft needs some choice in weapons even if the change is mostly aestetic.
Would you complain if they added the ability to color your arrows? It doesn't have a purpose, but does it really need to have a purpose? It would be there for special occasions when people want a flash of color. It's touches like this that teraria does a million times better than Minecraft.
I've already stated that I found critical issues with the armor tiers, but the weapon tiers are needed. Minecraft needs some choice in weapons even if the change is mostly aestetic.
Would you complain if they added the ability to color your arrows? It doesn't have a purpose, but does it really need to have a purpose? It would be there for special occasions when people want a flash of color. It's touches like this that teraria does a million times better than Minecraft.
Saying you want to have a few weapon types that just look different but have no functional difference, and saying that you want multiple weapon types and grades each with their own unique use, damage value, and damage type, are two totally different things.
The former is purely aesthetic, and is the same as having multiple colors of wool, or your example of colored arrows. The latter means that the player is now responsible for choosing an appropriate weapon for a given situation, and making an inappropriate choice could mean the difference between life and death. That kind of gameplay is best suited for games where combat and defense is the primary theme of the game.
As much as some of the people on these forums would like it to be, Minecraft really isn't a game where combat and defense is the primary theme. If it was, there would be no need for any block types other than the basic dirt, gravel, wood, cobble, and obsidian, and no need for any ores other than coal, iron, and diamond. Everything else in the game would be superfluous. Sheep could be removed entirely.
But that's not the case. About 85% of this game is about its sand-box aspects. There's some combat stuff thrown in to keep it interesting, and give you a better sense of survival, but that's it. There's a million games out there that do the whole "combat strategy" thing far better than Minecraft ever could, or should ever want to.
Also, please, please, for the love of god, stop the comparisons to Terraria. Yes, there are aspects of that game that are "better" than this one. But do I need to provide a list of things Minecraft does "better" than Terraria? Because that list is pretty long too. I like both games, for different reasons. But I certainly don't want them to both be the same game.
As much as I like Skyrim, the idea that its combat is 'complex' is a joke.
I meant in comparison to Minecraft. But you're right, I'm sure I could have chosen a better example. I only used Skyrim because an above poster mentioned "Elder Scrolls" games.
This, Vyktar, is by far the best idead I have seen in Minecraft`s history. It`s absolutly brilliant.
This would add a little more deapth and diversion to combat, witch again is badly needed. And allso make an toggable option for the fanboys, so they dont cry to much about it.
And I bet if the all mighty Jeb had come up with this idea, fanboys would have worshipped the ground he walks eaven more than they do.
You make a good point Divinius. You get kudos for that.
My support for this idea is limited. It would be nice if we had several reskinned versions of items, but it would be nice if there was some strategy for weapon choosing. This could easily be done by having slower attack swings.
I can't say for sure how this would affect combat in the long run.
Maybe sword swing rate should be slower in order to give a more forceful swing. again I'm unsure, it's just should be improved. Keeping it the way it is is just so unappealing, because the game is never going to be any more tactful with the current mechanics.
Every time someone compares Minecraft and Terraria as though they are direct competitors, I want to cry.
Two different games, two different styles, two different purposes. Apples and oranges.
Wait, what? Sure, they are very different, but they are still clear-cut competitors.
Someone would buy EITHER Minecraft OR Terraria for their friend's birthday, not both.
I really don't see what's wrong with adding 2 or so more weapons.
--Just have a weapon that swing slower with more damage(even a charge feature), a weapon with a tad less range and some bonus and maybe a dual wield weapon(possibly not because it would probably be the same as the one with the less range). A shield would add some differences too. If you want to get real technical: Sword: one handed Dagger: one handed but able to dual wield Pike: two handed Bow: two handed long range Shield: one handed
The quickest damage would come from dual wielding daggers, but they lack any range at all and you get 25% damage absorb from parry. They would have the most dps because it's 2 quick weapons.
Dagger+Shield: You can block for 75% damage reduction but you still have to attack close and a lot of damage is lost since you're using one dinky weapon, still fast however.
Sword+Shield: Like dagger+shield but you have more range, more damage, and attack slower.(Cannot dual wield Swords but using only a sword grants you more speed with it)
Pike: Slow, most range of melee, has charge attack.
Bow: Slow, but has range.
The slow heavy weapons make the best support while the quick weapons make the best ambush and the shield combo makes the best tank.
Simple in differences, complex in combinations. I would love this in MC.
I'am still trying to figure out what the O.P. was thinking when he started referring to using "diamond armor" in minecraft as "the current metagame"
just for the sake of it games I've seen that use the terminology of "metagame":
Magic The Gathering
Starcraft: Brood War
Warcraft 3: Frozen Throne
World of Warcarft
Starcraft 2: Wings of liberty
League of Legends
Heroes of Newerth
The focus of all of these games have the most complex and diverse ways of competing against other players.
vs minecrafts: "click stuff and it dies".
I cannot comprehend how in the world you actually thought it would be usefull to type out a multiple paragraph post about "minecraft combat meta" in a game more focused on dicking around rather than being the highest ping player on an SMP server.
Please stop these pointless and downright attention whoring topics filled with trendy words like "balance", "overpowered", "metagame" and others just to spice up your fancy combat suggestions. There is a dedicated subforum for that.
A game should focus on one genre, if it tries to focus on more, it becomes bad.
What does being fantasy has to do with it being another genre?
A game should focus on being as good as it can, not what genre it fits into. The point is that Minecraft has a combat system and it sucks. You have to fight to survive and build another day, so why not improve it a bit? Don't focus so much on genres.
I brought that up near the bottom of page 3! It's not attention whoring, it just seems to be a series of misunderstandings. See the OP, which I'm fairly sure you didn't even read before jumping in to critique it:
I did read the OP sorry to not dissapoint. There are a lot more glaring issues with it than just the usage of "internet-trend" words but those aren't for me to judge. The endless "balance" incitement doesn't do these forums or the game any good, especially not in a 1.1 discussion forum.
He wasn't talking about an actual "metagame", he just wasn't using the term correctly. And I don't see why describing the flaw you think you've found in the topic of your thread is a bad thing. If someone thinks they have a solution to the overpowered diamond gear, then how would it be "attention whoring" to say so, in those words, in the thread title? You are right about one thing, though; This is definitely supposed to be in the suggestions forum. I completely missed that.
The usage of the word "meta" implies certain things that aren't even applicable to minecraft. And if you are using "flavor of the month" words that incite flaming discussion (balance/meta discussions most of the time result in flames of one kind or more), I chose to call it attention whoring. He fancied up a suggestion as a discussion, posting it in the wrong forums to get more attention then one would get in the suggestion forum (wich it resides in now). Thats my take on it nothing more, nothing less
I didn't say his suggestion is attention whoring, his usage of terminology is. A topic started like "The solution to make Diamond armor less be all end all" will fall much nicer and without any preconceptions that come with the words balance and meta
Doesn't add anything at all?? Really? So you notice NO difference AT ALL between playing on peaceful, and playing on Hard?
Please, just stop. The combat system in this game is perfect for the game's overall style of play. Sure, there are some minor tweaks that could be made, but adding the levels of complexity and annoyance that this thread proposes are totally unnecessary, and would greatly detract from what Minecraft currently is.
Peaceful has no combat. The combat system is worthless. The mobs all have Down Syndrome or something and that's only just starting to get slightly improved. And there is absolutely no significant strategy or challenge involved.
As someone who does actual medieval combat, I cannot stress enough how unrealistic a mobility penalty is for armor. Maybe small penalties for sprinting, but that's it. Over the distances that most fighting covers, the amount of armor a person is wearing is not going to make a difference in how fast he can move. You wear armor so that you can approach your enemy safely. You never want a suit so heavy that you can't approach him.
Unless you have a horse and you know you won't have to get off of it. But then, eventually the horse is gonna take an arrow to the knee and the rider is too weighed down to get back to his buddies, so the peasants overrun him, wrestle him to the ground, and find a hole in the poor sap's armor big enough to fit a dagger. Then the former knight's buddies see him and think, "fat lot of good that pile of armor did him. Remind my blacksmith not to repeat that design."
The heaviest tier armor would only be used by people who focus on archery, because a slow opponent that cannot be defeated in melee will only be engaged by arrow. Not that fun.
Now, about those weapons varying in speed and damage. It's not adding much to the fighting system either. Minecraft's combat needs sophistication and entirely new mechanics. A delay between clicking and damage-dealing would add a lot, and make parrying useful. If a new weapon is added, it will want a new fighting style to go with it. I'm a fan of a spear that sacrifices knockback for reach, promoting a dodgy, retreating fighting style that closely mirrors how a real spear is used.
Personally I don't like how people have been making comments about MineCraft's lack of intended emphasis on combat. If a game is going to dabble in combat, it has to do a damn good job of it. I'm sick and tired of all of these things concerning "Minecraft is a sandbox game". I get it. That's how the whole game started. But I can't call Minecraft a full game if it's just sandbox. People reject perfectly good ideas on the basis that they genre-bend Minecraft. If you want to play your game with heavy emphasis on sandbox play, play creative or peaceful. Otherwise,
/soapbox on sandbox
If a game is going to dabble in combat, it has to do a damn good job of it.
EXACTLY!
"Oh, the combat is fine for Minecraft's simplistic style!" - No! There is a difference between "simplistic" and "lousy". Minecraft's combat is lousy. It needs to improve or be removed completely, not left as the insult it currently is.
As for this particular way to improve it, I can't imagine it would help much. Movement penalties for armor are just a pain. Attack delay, parrying (and some decent mob challenge to justify it), these things could help.
As someone who does actual medieval combat, I cannot stress enough how unrealistic a mobility penalty is for armor. Maybe small penalties for sprinting, but that's it. Over the distances that most fighting covers, the amount of armor a person is wearing is not going to make a difference in how fast he can move. You wear armor so that you can approach your enemy safely. You never want a suit so heavy that you can't approach him.
Unless you have a horse and you know you won't have to get off of it. But then, eventually the horse is gonna take an arrow to the knee and the rider is too weighed down to get back to his buddies, so the peasants overrun him, wrestle him to the ground, and find a hole in the poor sap's armor big enough to fit a dagger. Then the former knight's buddies see him and think, "fat lot of good that pile of armor did him. Remind my blacksmith not to repeat that design."
The heaviest tier armor would only be used by people who focus on archery, because a slow opponent that cannot be defeated in melee will only be engaged by arrow. Not that fun.
Hahah, "arrow to the knee." Sorry... On a serious note though, would you say heavier armor tires you out though right? And no maybe IN REAL LIFE people won't wear armor SO heavy that it impedes mobility. It is just a balancing mechanism, this is a game, it shouldn't reflect real life. And maybe the numbers given are a bit large of a mobility penalty, but as long as there is SOME movement penalty I'm fine.
Now, about those weapons varying in speed and damage. It's not adding much to the fighting system either. Minecraft's combat needs sophistication and entirely new mechanics. A delay between clicking and damage-dealing would add a lot, and make parrying useful. If a new weapon is added, it will want a new fighting style to go with it. I'm a fan of a spear that sacrifices knockback for reach, promoting a dodgy, retreating fighting style that closely mirrors how a real spear is used.
You really just contradicted yourself, delay between clicking = varying speed. It is just one way to implement it, and what I imagined would be the easiest to implement in the combat already. Delays between clicking would basically be a simpler way of "varying speed". All you are doing is not showing pulling the great sword back, then slashing.
Since when? I expect a non-retarded explanation why a game can't have more than one genre.
>Implying anybody said anything about Skyrim.
>Implying Minecraft has to be static.
>Implying people can't have opposing opinions.
That's a poor comeback.
You have a sword, or a bow and a flint/steel. That's it. Man really I have so many options to choose from to fight things. They should just keep the system exactly the same, because I'm afraid to add options.herp derp.
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=155932
Crates
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=239467
Item Scrolling
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=174539
I'll give you a very good one. When a game comes out that tries to cross multiple genres, several things are likely to happen:
First, People who like one of the genres, but not another, will dislike the game, or get annoyed/bored with it quickly, because it incorporates too much of the part they don't like.
Second, the game would suffer from a "jack of all trades, master of none" syndrome. Using minecraft as an example, combat will never be as refined, advanced, and complex as it is in something like Skyrim, no matter how much they add to it. And likewise, if the devs tried to focus on attempting to achieve that impossible goal within the confines of the game, the creative/sandbox portion would suffer as a consequence.
The new "Zombies can break doors" feature is a good example. People wanted the game to be "harder" so they are starting to add things in an attempt to increase the difficulty. In reality (as fun an idea as the door-breaking is), it really doesn't add anything to the difficulty, and actually detracts from creativity (as you can't use wooden doors anymore in your structures, if you don't want zombies in your house).
> Not understanding the concept of an example.
> Not understanding that there's a difference between a dynamic game and a game potentially suffering from an identity crisis.
> Not understanding that having an opinion of my own is different from implying people can't have opposing opinions.
It just could be better with options. I don't even see why there needs to be a specific advantage that one weapon needs to have over another one. Plenty of successful games have many similar weapons and it becomes a matter of personal taste which one they do even when they are just a reskinned version.
I don't understand the complaint that everything has to be super unique. Why complain that something doesn't have 15 different unique uses to it? Variety is a good thing and Minecraft needs more of it.
I've already stated that I found critical issues with the armor tiers, but the weapon tiers are needed. Minecraft needs some choice in weapons even if the change is mostly aestetic.
Would you complain if they added the ability to color your arrows? It doesn't have a purpose, but does it really need to have a purpose? It would be there for special occasions when people want a flash of color. It's touches like this that teraria does a million times better than Minecraft.
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=155932
Crates
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=239467
Item Scrolling
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=174539
As much as I like Skyrim, the idea that its combat is 'complex' is a joke.
Saying you want to have a few weapon types that just look different but have no functional difference, and saying that you want multiple weapon types and grades each with their own unique use, damage value, and damage type, are two totally different things.
The former is purely aesthetic, and is the same as having multiple colors of wool, or your example of colored arrows. The latter means that the player is now responsible for choosing an appropriate weapon for a given situation, and making an inappropriate choice could mean the difference between life and death. That kind of gameplay is best suited for games where combat and defense is the primary theme of the game.
As much as some of the people on these forums would like it to be, Minecraft really isn't a game where combat and defense is the primary theme. If it was, there would be no need for any block types other than the basic dirt, gravel, wood, cobble, and obsidian, and no need for any ores other than coal, iron, and diamond. Everything else in the game would be superfluous. Sheep could be removed entirely.
But that's not the case. About 85% of this game is about its sand-box aspects. There's some combat stuff thrown in to keep it interesting, and give you a better sense of survival, but that's it. There's a million games out there that do the whole "combat strategy" thing far better than Minecraft ever could, or should ever want to.
Also, please, please, for the love of god, stop the comparisons to Terraria. Yes, there are aspects of that game that are "better" than this one. But do I need to provide a list of things Minecraft does "better" than Terraria? Because that list is pretty long too. I like both games, for different reasons. But I certainly don't want them to both be the same game.
I meant in comparison to Minecraft. But you're right, I'm sure I could have chosen a better example. I only used Skyrim because an above poster mentioned "Elder Scrolls" games.
This would add a little more deapth and diversion to combat, witch again is badly needed. And allso make an toggable option for the fanboys, so they dont cry to much about it.
And I bet if the all mighty Jeb had come up with this idea, fanboys would have worshipped the ground he walks eaven more than they do.
My support for this idea is limited. It would be nice if we had several reskinned versions of items, but it would be nice if there was some strategy for weapon choosing. This could easily be done by having slower attack swings.
I can't say for sure how this would affect combat in the long run.
Maybe sword swing rate should be slower in order to give a more forceful swing. again I'm unsure, it's just should be improved. Keeping it the way it is is just so unappealing, because the game is never going to be any more tactful with the current mechanics.
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=155932
Crates
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=239467
Item Scrolling
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=174539
Wait, what? Sure, they are very different, but they are still clear-cut competitors.
Someone would buy EITHER Minecraft OR Terraria for their friend's birthday, not both.
--Just have a weapon that swing slower with more damage(even a charge feature), a weapon with a tad less range and some bonus and maybe a dual wield weapon(possibly not because it would probably be the same as the one with the less range). A shield would add some differences too.
If you want to get real technical:
Sword: one handed
Dagger: one handed but able to dual wield
Pike: two handed
Bow: two handed long range
Shield: one handed
The quickest damage would come from dual wielding daggers, but they lack any range at all and you get 25% damage absorb from parry. They would have the most dps because it's 2 quick weapons.
Dagger+Shield: You can block for 75% damage reduction but you still have to attack close and a lot of damage is lost since you're using one dinky weapon, still fast however.
Sword+Shield: Like dagger+shield but you have more range, more damage, and attack slower.(Cannot dual wield Swords but using only a sword grants you more speed with it)
Pike: Slow, most range of melee, has charge attack.
Bow: Slow, but has range.
The slow heavy weapons make the best support while the quick weapons make the best ambush and the shield combo makes the best tank.
Simple in differences, complex in combinations. I would love this in MC.
just for the sake of it games I've seen that use the terminology of "metagame":
Magic The Gathering
Starcraft: Brood War
Warcraft 3: Frozen Throne
World of Warcarft
Starcraft 2: Wings of liberty
League of Legends
Heroes of Newerth
The focus of all of these games have the most complex and diverse ways of competing against other players.
vs minecrafts: "click stuff and it dies".
I cannot comprehend how in the world you actually thought it would be usefull to type out a multiple paragraph post about "minecraft combat meta" in a game more focused on dicking around rather than being the highest ping player on an SMP server.
Please stop these pointless and downright attention whoring topics filled with trendy words like "balance", "overpowered", "metagame" and others just to spice up your fancy combat suggestions. There is a dedicated subforum for that.
regards
A game should focus on being as good as it can, not what genre it fits into. The point is that Minecraft has a combat system and it sucks. You have to fight to survive and build another day, so why not improve it a bit? Don't focus so much on genres.
I did read the OP sorry to not dissapoint. There are a lot more glaring issues with it than just the usage of "internet-trend" words but those aren't for me to judge. The endless "balance" incitement doesn't do these forums or the game any good, especially not in a 1.1 discussion forum.
The usage of the word "meta" implies certain things that aren't even applicable to minecraft. And if you are using "flavor of the month" words that incite flaming discussion (balance/meta discussions most of the time result in flames of one kind or more), I chose to call it attention whoring. He fancied up a suggestion as a discussion, posting it in the wrong forums to get more attention then one would get in the suggestion forum (wich it resides in now). Thats my take on it nothing more, nothing less
I didn't say his suggestion is attention whoring, his usage of terminology is. A topic started like "The solution to make Diamond armor less be all end all" will fall much nicer and without any preconceptions that come with the words balance and meta
regards
Peaceful has no combat. The combat system is worthless. The mobs all have Down Syndrome or something and that's only just starting to get slightly improved. And there is absolutely no significant strategy or challenge involved.
Unless you have a horse and you know you won't have to get off of it. But then, eventually the horse is gonna take an arrow to the knee and the rider is too weighed down to get back to his buddies, so the peasants overrun him, wrestle him to the ground, and find a hole in the poor sap's armor big enough to fit a dagger. Then the former knight's buddies see him and think, "fat lot of good that pile of armor did him. Remind my blacksmith not to repeat that design."
The heaviest tier armor would only be used by people who focus on archery, because a slow opponent that cannot be defeated in melee will only be engaged by arrow. Not that fun.
Now, about those weapons varying in speed and damage. It's not adding much to the fighting system either. Minecraft's combat needs sophistication and entirely new mechanics. A delay between clicking and damage-dealing would add a lot, and make parrying useful. If a new weapon is added, it will want a new fighting style to go with it. I'm a fan of a spear that sacrifices knockback for reach, promoting a dodgy, retreating fighting style that closely mirrors how a real spear is used.
How to not die in a cave
/soapbox on sandbox
EXACTLY!
"Oh, the combat is fine for Minecraft's simplistic style!" - No! There is a difference between "simplistic" and "lousy". Minecraft's combat is lousy. It needs to improve or be removed completely, not left as the insult it currently is.
As for this particular way to improve it, I can't imagine it would help much. Movement penalties for armor are just a pain. Attack delay, parrying (and some decent mob challenge to justify it), these things could help.
Hahah, "arrow to the knee." Sorry... On a serious note though, would you say heavier armor tires you out though right? And no maybe IN REAL LIFE people won't wear armor SO heavy that it impedes mobility. It is just a balancing mechanism, this is a game, it shouldn't reflect real life. And maybe the numbers given are a bit large of a mobility penalty, but as long as there is SOME movement penalty I'm fine.
You really just contradicted yourself, delay between clicking = varying speed. It is just one way to implement it, and what I imagined would be the easiest to implement in the combat already. Delays between clicking would basically be a simpler way of "varying speed". All you are doing is not showing pulling the great sword back, then slashing.
Spears would be nice.