Player/Weapon Collision

I'm just curious as to how this is handled...

For player collision, a simple yes or no is easy enough, but weapon collision appears to be in the game from the videos that I saw. Will we actually be seeing meaningful character hits? Or, are weapons still going to be passing through the character models; like every other game out there?

Personally, I liked the immersion factor of locking swords with someone. Like the animations in the old kotor games. I'm no dev, so I'm not sure how this would be handled. Especially in an MMO. But it was nice seeing a skeleton block a slash and not have the sword simply go right through him.

What's the hit system going to be like? Hit's/misses/grazes/dodges/parrys/blocks?

Any insight would be great, and the game is looking fantastic, even in a pre-alpha state.
«1

Comments

  • i miss player collision, like holding a breach in a keep wall with a bunch of tanks standing side by side... i really hope this will exist in ashes
  • Blocking off trade routes to set up ambushes would be pretty cool too. You could do this to some extent with Archeage. But, you should be able to destroy whatever is in your path without hesitation.

    Making a proper phalanx in an mmo would be sick too. Like you're saying Shunex.
  • Ooooo a ability to "lock" shields with other tanks effectively turning 2 or more people into 1 solid arse-kicking wall man that would be amazing...
  • [quote quote=737]Ooooo a ability to “lock” shields with other tanks effectively turning 2 or more people into 1 solid arse-kicking wall man that would be amazing…

    [/quote]

    Like a Roman Testudo. Of course the mechanics, in game, of maintaining that spacing would be interesting.
  • I think it could work similarly to Dragon Age Inquisition's "Hold the Line" Ability. Basically, draw a line perpendicular to the characters viewpoint, and have it so reds collide with it, but friendly's don't. Multiple tanks ability can overlap, and you get yourself a shield wall. Maybe with a bonus to friendly's defense and knockdown resistance in said area of effect.

    Actually having to flank the tank line vs simply zerging the healers would be pretty badass imo.
  • Hi guys!

    Just wanted to add our perspective here to this, because I think collision can do some interesting and cool things for gameplay. Here are some thoughts on that:

    Character collision in an MMO has a certain set of problems associated with it. The biggest of them, and the hardest to manage, is the use of collision to grief others. Anything from having a group of folks stand around an NPC or quest target so that others can't interact with it, to someone going AFK in a doorway so that players can't enter a structure, a lot of unintended problems arise from collision.

    That being said, collision is pretty rad from a tactical point of view. Being able to physically interpose yourself between an opponent and a squishy is an option in combat that I've always wanted - it's a way to play that is really open ended, and I'm sure a clever player can find endless ways to use it to their advantage. The question in implementation is always, "Do we gain more than we lose by doing this?" Which, though a simple question, is one that isn't always simple to answer, and in this particular case is something that we continue to go back and forth on.

    So that's the sort of big picture of that problem, and one that we're not really set to answer just yet. What I can say is that the tank archetype *does* have some abilities that are similar to what Drask mentions. Just because we're not ready to go global with collision, doesn't mean we can't play with it in situational circumstances! :)
  • simple answer: rolls.

    this keeps greifing down since you can roll through someone to get where you need

    it doesnt hurt pvp because: are you dumb enough to think you can survive rolling behind a shield wall - being in the middle or the enemy lines = atacks from all sides
  • I think that the griefing can be kept down by making it so the collision is only happening against "red" players/npc's. There wouldn't be much point in having collision with "green" players, other than being realistic. That way, if someone is actually able to grief you using this mechanic...at least you can get them out of the way via an axe to the head.

    But, it's nice to know that the devs are considering it.

    Thanks for the feedback.
  • having collision working only for against red players imo is silly.

    If anything have it "disabled" in towns witch are safe zones anyways so no real point in having it there. and "enabled" when you leave.

    As for the open world quest interactions you can always flag on the person blocking, kill them and then talk to the NPC. or you can make the quest interaction radius bigger so that you can talk to the npc from 5 meters away. (lets face it who stands a inch away from the person your speaking to IRL anyways)
  • I like collision system. So about players block acces to door or npcs by afk, I believe in a detect system, for example, If a player exit your place and place a character to block acces, this enter in afk without movement or activiy maybe in 5 min and kick player from place.

    I'm accord with @shunex, in save zones how cities, collision system isn't necesary.

    With time talking and thinking about, I believe that developers found a good collision system.

    Regards
  • I'm not going to pretend to know anything about game development, but wouldn't it be possible to have player collision activated only while in combat or in a pvp zone, so you still have the tactical situations that come with it, but then have it deactivated while outside of combat/in towns and such to prevent griefing?
  • I personally love the idea of player collision. While it can certainly come with its cons, I find that there are ways to work around these cons. For instance ArcheAge has player collision, and considering that, relatively low amounts of griefing as players can just easily push other players out of the way by running into them if someone attempts to block an NPC for example. Another game that comes to mind is an indie title called Mortal Online which is a first person MMO with collision. They included an action that allows your character to physically push another character with your arms. Which works great to move players who are blocking a door ect ect. I think as long as characters don't act like brick walls and that you give the players the ability to move other players who would potentially be griefing, then it won't be a problem.

    I'm a really big fan of unit collision if done right. It would allow for some really neat tactics where tanky players will actually be able to protect healers or mages ect.. by standing in the way of attackers. Plus, there's something just odd about pvp when a character runs through you to hit you in the back.. I just hate that..
  • I love the idea of 'temporary' battle formations like shield walls or arrow barrage.
    Maybe with a cooldown mechanism to err on the safe side of griefing.
    If they are very carefully managed, they no doubt will add an immense amount of tactical combat options to the game.
    The emphasis on being very carefully managed.

    It would be advisable to add a significant weakness as well as a significant advantage though.
    If such special skills are more powerful, than they will be used all the time unless it comes with deterrents and/or limitations and/or equal and opposite counters.
  • a simpler away around collision is pushing :)

    if one person is stood in doorway then another person pushing to get in would simply push the person inside the building, unless of course equal force meaning that the griefer is actually also pushing against you, but then a little switcharoo so instead of pushing you move to left/right/backwards and the griefer in fact runs out of way.

    If its a player or shield wall, then surely a larger group of players walling up would simply smash through / push through, or even the most organised would stay the strongest, again looking at the roman guard scenario there are many of records of other forces trying this against small roman forces and yet because of their more coordinated movement they would still smash through

    so collision is an easy fix just allow pushing, of course this could be used for grief mechanics, pushing people away from structures or off bridges, but then if any damage occurs to player the outcome is similar to hitting someone with weapon or spell that deals damage
  • Alternatively, if they can find a way to make it so you can run through ppl that are green but not through ppl who are purple or red. that would be great. so in towns and stuff there would be no issues.. but the moment you're in combat with someone, they act as an object you can't simply pass through anymore.

    But I imagine that would take a crap ton of coding and would be a lot more difficult than just having ppl act as solid objects all the time.. Now you'd have to set conditions and also would have more room for bugs and glitches.
  • [quote quote=821]Hi guys!

    Just wanted to add our perspective here to this, because I think collision can do some interesting and cool things for gameplay. Here are some thoughts on that:

    Character collision in an MMO has a certain set of problems associated with it. The biggest of them, and the hardest to manage, is the use of collision to grief others. Anything from having a group of folks stand around an NPC or quest target so that others can’t interact with it, to someone going AFK in a doorway so that players can’t enter a structure, a lot of unintended problems arise from collision.

    That being said, collision is pretty rad from a tactical point of view. Being able to physically interpose yourself between an opponent and a squishy is an option in combat that I’ve always wanted – it’s a way to play that is really open ended, and I’m sure a clever player can find endless ways to use it to their advantage. The question in implementation is always, “Do we gain more than we lose by doing this?” Which, though a simple question, is one that isn’t always simple to answer, and in this particular case is something that we continue to go back and forth on.

    So that’s the sort of big picture of that problem, and one that we’re not really set to answer just yet. What I can say is that the tank archetype *does* have some abilities that are similar to what Drask mentions. Just because we’re not ready to go global with collision, doesn’t mean we can’t play with it in situational circumstances! <img alt="?" src="https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/2.2.1/svg/1f642.svg" />

    [/quote]
    Having Player/global Collision is always the way to go. Sure theirs greifers, but there's just as many without collision.

    Collision just has too many pros and well is just plain fun and more immersive than when everyone runs through each other. Games with collision have found ways for people still able to talk to npcs as long as they are near them even if people are blocking. But there's nothing like<strong> open world collision</strong>, especially if you have sea content or even horses bumping into each other. Chasing or running away from someone and still having to dodge/avoid people as you run<strong> just adds to that adrenaline rush that this genre has been lacking for so long.</strong>
  • [quote quote=821]Hi guys!

    Just wanted to add our perspective here to this, because I think collision can do some interesting and cool things for gameplay. Here are some thoughts on that:

    Character collision in an MMO has a certain set of problems associated with it. The biggest of them, and the hardest to manage, is the use of collision to grief others. Anything from having a group of folks stand around an NPC or quest target so that others can’t interact with it, to someone going AFK in a doorway so that players can’t enter a structure, a lot of unintended problems arise from collision.

    That being said, collision is pretty rad from a tactical point of view. Being able to physically interpose yourself between an opponent and a squishy is an option in combat that I’ve always wanted – it’s a way to play that is really open ended, and I’m sure a clever player can find endless ways to use it to their advantage. The question in implementation is always, “Do we gain more than we lose by doing this?” Which, though a simple question, is one that isn’t always simple to answer, and in this particular case is something that we continue to go back and forth on.

    So that’s the sort of big picture of that problem, and one that we’re not really set to answer just yet. What I can say is that the tank archetype *does* have some abilities that are similar to what Drask mentions. Just because we’re not ready to go global with collision, doesn’t mean we can’t play with it in situational circumstances! <img alt="?" src="https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/2.2.1/svg/1f642.svg" />

    [/quote]

    Apparently the first time i posted it vanished lol(dunno if thats a website wrror or cus i quoted an intrepid guy)

    anyways, global collisions pro highly outweigh its cons in an open world mmorpg. If your worried about npcs getting blocked off, games have Incorporated ways to still talk to npcs when not right next to them if people are blocking. there will always be greifers whether you have collision or not, they always find a way. So taking it away just cus of that ruins the experiences and immersion you can have in out of town scenarios and especially fighting. Scenarios like chasing someone or running from someone, having to dodge and avoid people as your running just adds that <strong>adrenaline rush that this genre has been lacking for so many years.</strong> especially if you add sea content you definitely need collision, boats going through eachother is dumb.

    TLDR: collision is more fun, immersive, and has more potential. Taking away a feature just cus a few people like to greif is why mmorpgs have gone down such the shitty route they have been on.
  • I love collision in games and I've played a few that have done it well. As others have said, there are some easy solutions to the few problems that I've seen games implement. I'd suggest turning it off in safe zones (towns, anywhere there's an NPC, in front of dungeons, etc.) and allow people to push friendly targets so if someone does AFK somewhere outside a safe zone and you need to get by, you still can. Easy solutions to a system that would have a ton of gameplay benefits.

    Sidenote - making the above mentioned spots "safe zones", instead of just turning off collision in those spots, would be useful in PvP as well.
  • Too much posts for me to read o.o

    But I also do want player collision back into MMOs! It makes it feel more natural and makes it far more interesting. Also, if they do add it, it would become an interesting feature towards the game! Although it would be an issue towards crowded areas, there is a solution. Rather than collision, make it more of a push. So then in crowded areas, we can slip and pass people. :D.
  • I'm hoping for collision so tanks can block enemies and armies can't stack on 1 person. It would be nice if it was taken a step further and collision was added to projectiles/spells, allowing players to block abilities for each other. Tanks could actually tank in pvp, similar to reinhardt tanks in overwatch.
  • [quote quote=1854]a simpler away around collision is pushing <img alt="?" src="https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/2.2.1/svg/1f642.svg" /> [/quote]

    ^Actually, this might work.
    Make global collision detection, but if a person stands still and you walk into him, you will simply just push him away.
    For the shield wall scenario, you can give any class with a shield, an ability to "Stand Your Ground". This ability makes you immovable, making you able to raise your shield in place, focussing on protecting yourself and hold enemies at bay. Tho, this ability consume stamina/endurance, so you can only do this for a certain time.

    This could work? That would make tanks good in a group in keep defences. I always felt pure tanks were left out for damage dealers.

    I loved collision detection in Warhammer Online.
    My best moment was when we were defending a keep. The game was just released, so people were uncertain of where the best defence line was when trying to defend a keep. Ppl always ran to the keep lord. But doing so, made the enemies able to come in and simply just pull the lord. Our Warband Leader rage quitted, when we only had 1 keep left. I was playing my Chosen, and I felt useless. But then me and another tank, came up with the idea of just standing at the gate when it breached. A lot of people denied the fact it might work. So when the gate breached, a lot of people ran upstairs. But me and the other tank standed our ground in the gate, making people unable to come inside. A healer stood behind us and healed when necessary and if we were kicked back, we went straight back to the opening, only allowing a few people inside and they died quickly when they ran upstairs to everyone else. In like 30 secs, our warband couldn't understand why everyone was still outside. But finally they realised that it was only 3 people holding a full warband from entering the keep. Realising this, more shield tanks came down to us, casters/ranged went to the walls for shooting gallery and oil was planted so it could hit the ppl standing near the gate. We won the fight, even though we were a lot fewer than the enemy! The oil did most of the work, cus' ppl was clustered near the gate, Casters/ranged picked off their healers and damage dealers went out of the back of the keep to flank those hugging the walls. It was a glorious fight! In that exact moment, I felt in love with collision detection!

    Make it happen!
  • Love the idea of collision especially as someone with a wide array of raiding experience I think having meaningfull spots for people to stand and the threat of some numpty pushing a healer into that patch of fire beside him and stuff like that would make raiding a bit more strategic. Also love the phalanx idea or shield wall would be interesting for a few tank style classes to be able to interlock thier shields and what not. Would be very fun to blockade a caravan or hold doors or openings as a line in the midst of a siege.
  • This is exactly how sieges should work. The defenders should always have the advantage of using chokepoints that will actually force the enemy to fight through! Rather than just zerging through and hitting objective x for the win.

    It allows for more interesting use of castle defenses as well.

    If sieges are supposed to be dynamic and available on the fly. Rather than being scheduled. The attackers would have the advantage of knowing where and when the attack takes place. So they can have all of their players ready for that event. The defenders (likely) wouldn't know when or where the attack would happen, so they should have the advantage of being able to defend that town with fewer people. I mean, the town players are the ones that spent all that time and resources on building up the town. They should always have the advantage.

    Mechanics like this would make that possible.
  • Drask said:
    " ... Personally, I liked the immersion factor of locking swords with someone. Like the animations in the old kotor games. I'm no dev, so I'm not sure how this would be handled. Especially in an MMO. But it was nice seeing a skeleton block a slash and not have the sword simply go right through him ... "
    agreed
  • Player collisions should be disabled in towns and other crowded spots, otherwise a troll can just block the entrance to an auction house or something. 
  • Also with this you dont want to make combat tedious, maybe some sort of strategy is good, i understand your speculation in that case but for example, if you are being attacked or attacking and you or the opponent is ignoring that fact, i think a slowing response effect will should occur, meaning you take longer to respond and react if you ignore the physics of combat or else collisions might become mundane.
  • Steven has said on livestream (I don't know which one exactly) that cities are not "safe zones". You can attack players in cities it's just that you will have to deal with all the guards...
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited July 2017
    Irobot said:
    Player collisions should be disabled in towns and other crowded spots, otherwise a troll can just block the entrance to an auction house or something. 
    That would kind of ruin immersion if you have people standing inside one another, imho.

    I personally like what's called 'soft' collision detection on friendlies. This allows you to basically push past another player if you exert force for a couple secs.
  • Collision aren't work in a MMO. In a low player number environment it works, but when there are hundreds of players in the same place, then they just block the shit out from each other, even if it aren't on purpose.
    Also it offers heavy griefing potential. So no, probably there won't be collision.

    And for the other one. There will be thousands of different models in the game. If there are only one or two different enemy, then they can animate it to look good, but if there are thousands of different sized and shaped models, then it would take decades to animate every siltation to look good.
    You see, it's a extremely time consuming process for very minimal benefit, so no.

  • numinae said:
    Hi guys!

    Just wanted to add our perspective here to this, because I think collision can do some interesting and cool things for gameplay. Here are some thoughts on that:

    Character collision in an MMO has a certain set of problems associated with it. The biggest of them, and the hardest to manage, is the use of collision to grief others. Anything from having a group of folks stand around an NPC or quest target so that others can't interact with it, to someone going AFK in a doorway so that players can't enter a structure, a lot of unintended problems arise from collision.

    That being said, collision is pretty rad from a tactical point of view. Being able to physically interpose yourself between an opponent and a squishy is an option in combat that I've always wanted - it's a way to play that is really open ended, and I'm sure a clever player can find endless ways to use it to their advantage. The question in implementation is always, "Do we gain more than we lose by doing this?" Which, though a simple question, is one that isn't always simple to answer, and in this particular case is something that we continue to go back and forth on.

    So that's the sort of big picture of that problem, and one that we're not really set to answer just yet. What I can say is that the tank archetype *does* have some abilities that are similar to what Drask mentions. Just because we're not ready to go global with collision, doesn't mean we can't play with it in situational circumstances! :)
    Thanks for that response, and that perspective. Yes, there's a lot to be said for pros and cons; it'll be interesting to watch how things shape up.
Sign In or Register to comment.