Different sized hitboxes - A Suggestion.

Based in the Wiki, the hitbox discussion doesn't seem finalized yet, so I thought about how one would maybe try and balance different sized characters with different sized hitboxes as a test towards how damage is calculated for projectile type skills and abilities.

https://ibb.co/xYHTF30
I made a example scene with two different sized rigs to illustrate - imagine the one to the left is an ORC model, and the one to the right is a smaller Dwarf model. If the hitboxes were this size, it would obviously be an advantage for the Dwarf, as its way easier to hit the Orc overal with for example an arrow.

So my suggestion for the devs is to test out a duplicate hit-detection system for the rigs.

Kinda like this:
https://ibb.co/q12wn3d
Here we see two bone systems (used as hit-detection) within the bigger Orc model, and to balance out the difference of the two characters, the outer layer of "hitboxes" in the bigger model takes less damage than the smaller ones behind it. The smaller bones are calculated to be as big in volume as the smallest character.

If an arrow hits the legs of the Dwarf model, it for example does 50 damage.
If an arrow hits the outer edges of the same leg for the Orc, it does 10 damage. Only if both hit-boxes are hit, it does the total 50 damage 10dmg for outer hitboxes and 40dmg for inner hotboxes, so to do max damage on the Orc model, you have more or less the same "volume" of area as the Dwarf model.

An alternative to this, while still trying out double-sets of hitboxes would be to try and figure out where "critical parts" of the body was. This way we can remove some of the hitboxes and only place them logically in the rig where "big" damage makes sense. Heart, lungs, liver etc. But the main point is to calculate the overall volume total that is used in the smallest Playable rig and its hitbox, to simulate the same volume within the bigger models and their hitboxes.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

oophus

Noaani wrote: »

oophus wrote: »

You can't speak on their behalves in what they think and what they need in terms of suggestions, and what to discuss out here!

I'm not, I'm saying that if any assumptions are going to be made (which is exactly what you did) the assumptions should be that Intrepid know what the fuck they are doing.

Literally any time you need to make an assumption about this game, that is what should be the guide.

Where do I state that they don't know what they are doing? I wouldn't have registered here in the first place if that was my stance!

You are pissed off because you put your own spin on stuff I say based on your lack of depth in the topics I touch! I don't care if you don't understand something about the tech, especially when you don't ask questions about it as I know the devs will! Most of this is to help put ideas out there so they can do whatever they want with it.

This feedback, ideas, comments etc is for them, not for you!

Discussing whether they have any value for this is not for you to decide! They are perfectly capable to step in and ask people to stop if someone goes too far, so stop trying to babysit them.

Noaani

oophus wrote: »

Where do I state that they don't know what they are doing?

I'm just going to use one of your posts from this thread - I'm not going to look at other posts, nor at other threads.

The post in question is the one where you don't know how to use BBCode quoting.

oophus wrote: »

But this idea can actually make head hitbox mechanics work, if they want.

Here you are coming across as if to say Intrepid don't want headshots because they can't get them to work, but your idea would allow it.

Simply because it standardize around volume, with hit detection based on sizes of the characters. For the combat feel, this is what would feel the best.

Here you are saying that you know what would feel best for this game, more than the developers would know - somehow you know this without knowing literally anything at all about the game.

No, the wiki especially says that they are testing out the viability to have different sized hitboxes, but they may end up having a single unified hitbox.

Here you are acknowledging that you understand the fact that they have systems lined up to test, yet you are still pushing your idea as being better.

If they end up using the single unified hitox, then that is the same as saying "we couldn't make varied hitxoes to work, so we gave up".

Here you are providing Intrepid developers with a fail condition - despite having no idea at all about anything to do with the game.

The ultimate goal for them is to make varied hitxoes work, because that will feel the best for the combat system. Their backup is to drop it.

Here you are telling the develoeprs what they should be focusing on, as we have discussed already.

Do you now see why I consider your posts to be overtly arrogant?

oophus

Noaani wrote: »

oophus wrote: »

Where do I state that they don't know what they are doing?

I'm just going to use one of your posts from this thread - I'm not going to look at other posts, nor at other threads.

The post in question is the one where you don't know how to use BBCode quoting.

oophus wrote: »

But this idea can actually make head hitbox mechanics work, if they want.

Here you are coming across as if to say Intrepid don't want headshots because they can't get them to work, but your idea would allow it.

Simply because it standardize around volume, with hit detection based on sizes of the characters. For the combat feel, this is what would feel the best.

Here you are saying that you know what would feel best for this game, more than the developers would know - somehow you know this without knowing literally anything at all about the game.

No, the wiki especially says that they are testing out the viability to have different sized hitboxes, but they may end up having a single unified hitbox.

Here you are acknowledging that you understand the fact that they have systems lined up to test, yet you are still pushing your idea as being better.

If they end up using the single unified hitox, then that is the same as saying "we couldn't make varied hitxoes to work, so we gave up".

Here you are providing Intrepid developers with a fail condition - despite having no idea at all about anything to do with the game.

The ultimate goal for them is to make varied hitxoes work, because that will feel the best for the combat system. Their backup is to drop it.

Here you are telling the develoeprs what they should be focusing on, as we have discussed already.

Do you now see why I consider your posts to be overtly arrogant?

1. The double-hitbox system would be more data-intensive. One of the reasons they don't want a complex system may be to ease off on data-processing, but neither you nor I know the reasons as we haven't been told specifically as to why yet. Thus the best thing we can do is add suggestions for them to evaluate since THEY know the limitations on their own system. If that is the reason, then they don't even test it. But if its not, that means its possible to test it. The reason I gave this suggestion is because I've never seen it in action before, and it adresses a possible problem of different volume situations in a game such as this. Have they thought of it? Maybe they have, or maybe not. But I'm nok talking the chance that they have either way. Its better to have it here in case they haven't, than assuming that they have for all suggestions and ideas. That would make this forum useless if everyone assumed the devs are more or less gods. Something I highly disagree with seeing as they ended up utilizing the fireball animation up to this point. Both its length, its flamboyant style, and for it to be a total animation-lock for a skill this early. They can handle feedback on it, and its way better for something to raise the alarm now, than to do it later.

2. All of it is suggestions based on my thoughts. Its not etched in stone as some form of universal truths! I'm talking to grown ups here, people who have been in this business for years! They know how to have normal discussions and can handle feedback. The meaning behind that quote is me saying that I feel the game would feel the best if they were able to end up having different sized hitboxes while it still made sense. So I'm sceptical on they still trying ways to make it work - thus this thread and this suggestions. Basing hitboxes on volume to get max damage makes sense to me. Will it do that for them while testing? Maybe not, but at least then they tested or evaluated the possibility - which is all I can ask for.

3.Yes. They are still testing, and I gave them an idea on another system to test. The fact that they haven't figured it out yet means they should be open and happy to see ideas on this.
You trying to push ideas down and away from the forum is just idiotic.

4. I know how hitboxes work, and I know plenty about gamedesign, and how difficult this problem is! This is one of many, many alternatives to test, and my idea may even not be utilized like how it is lined out to be, but it can be a basis for something else.

5. I don't care what you think about my posts. If you think I'm being arrogant, then so be it. I know the devs won't think that way, as they are used to alter their work all the time. Its the life of being a developer. Ideas are meant to be plentiful and that's why we have brainstorm sessions. The more alternatives for testing there is, the better!

FuryBladeborne

There is this really awesome feature in the forums where you can click on a posters name and on the next screen there is an ignore option right next to the message option. If I was in an argument like that, I would have blocked Noaani several posts ago. I almost did a while back.

Vhaeyne

FuryBladeborne wrote: »

There is this really awesome feature in the forums where you can click on a posters name and on the next screen there is an ignore option right next to the message option. If I was in an argument like that, I would have blocked Noaani several posts ago. I almost did a while back.

What is the point in coming on the forums than? I like it when people agree with me, but sometimes people like Noaani help me to see the short comings in my opinions. I have argued with Noaani a few times in the months I have been here. Never came out of it hating him. It normally helps me to refine opinions that just started as gut feelings.

Noaani

Vhaeyne wrote: »

FuryBladeborne wrote: »

There is this really awesome feature in the forums where you can click on a posters name and on the next screen there is an ignore option right next to the message option. If I was in an argument like that, I would have blocked Noaani several posts ago. I almost did a while back.

What is the point in coming on the forums than? I like it when people agree with me, but sometimes people like Noaani help me to see the short comings in my opinions. I have argued with Noaani a few times in the months I have been here. Never came out of it hating him. It normally helps me to refine opinions that just started as gut feelings.

Indeed.

With some people, when you challenge what they think, they reassess their opinion. Sometimes they change it, sometimes they don't. These people are always good to have discussions with, as these discussions are never about trying to prove one is right and one is wrong, but tend to be more about understanding the other persons perspective, even if everyone eventually still disagrees.

Other people, when you challenge their opinion, they refuse to reassess their opinion, and often start claiming questions on their opinion are personal attacks (this is the easiest way to recognize this type of poster).

When I engage with a poster on a topic, I give them every opportunity to decide which of these two they want to be. I prefer the former of the two, but won't shy away from the latter.

Child Item