fighting hunting styles

just wanted to make a thread bout this, some predators in real life are ambush predators so to include something like that would be great and i seen this show about ancient animals and how one animal hide at waters edge in lake and wait for a small creature to go an get a drink , then the predator would grab and pull it under water would we be able to include something like that and how would we imply something like this if we could

Impliment a stealth game style thingy into it. annn done

Anyways if this is implimented there would probably be parts or something like that that add to the sneak skill and allow you to make sneak kills. Free food if you add to it but it would also deal with the size of your creature.

@OP Sorry, what was that?

i just had an idea of a creature like a crab big as a dog really wide and a small creature like cat to walk by then the crab like creature can grab it and drown it

mike roberts wrote:

just wanted to make a thread bout this, some predators in real life are ambush predators so to include something like that would be great and i seen this show about ancient animals and how one animal hide at waters edge in lake and wait for a small creature to go an get a drink , then the predator would grab and pull it under water would we be able to include something like that and how would we imply something like this if we could

I do remember an entry on close-range combat by our old friend, RedstarSound. It was posted by US_of_Alaska in another thread about combat, I believe. Unfortunately that makes this thread a duplicate. Regardless;

ALASKAAAA!

Fetch me that entry would ya?

Noitulove wrote:

mike roberts wrote:

just wanted to make a thread bout this, some predators in real life are ambush predators so to include something like that would be great and i seen this show about ancient animals and how one animal hide at waters edge in lake and wait for a small creature to go an get a drink , then the predator would grab and pull it under water would we be able to include something like that and how would we imply something like this if we could

I do remember an entry on close-range combat by our old friend, RedstarSound. It was posted by US_of_Alaska in another thread about combat, I believe. Unfortunately that makes this thread a duplicate. Regardless;

ALASKAAAA!

Fetch me that entry would ya?

Ugh. This could take a while.

Search...

Search returned nothing...

Manually searching...

Okay, i did not find a thread dedicated to it anywhere. At all. If i've posted it in these forums, i must have done so in somebody else's thread. I can try looking through my posts, i guess.

Looking through my posts...

And... Nothing. And since the old Svenolutions! Forums are down, there's no way i can go and find it. I guess we'll just have to reconstruct it by memory. Belgium.

EDIT: HA! I found it! I win!

RedStar wrote:

The purpose of this thread is to determine how, exactly, the game will handle melee combat - that is, damage dealt by one creature striking another with a weapon or object.

Every weapon MUST have a "Strike Point" and a "Grip". When an object is picked up off the ground, a player could choose where to hold it, thus setting the "Grip". The part of the weapon furthest from the "Grip" would automatically be the "Strike Point", i.e. the part that the attacker is trying to hit its target with.

Both of these would also be Function Parts in the Tech Object editor (unlocked by the "Knapping" Research Item); they would essentially be meta-balls that are invisible outside of the editor

As I see it, there are three main types of melee damage.

1) Anything with a narrow point - essentially anything where three or more planes all converge at very acute angles (where average angle is <30 deg.), like a steak knife or a spear head, would be able to inflict Stabbing or Slashing damage, at the player's discretion.
2) Anything where two planes converge at a very acute angle (avg. angle over run of edge <30 deg.), like an axe head, would inflict Slashing damage.
3) Anything with no narrow angles would deal normal Bludgeoning damage.

The three damage types would be calculated by different means; there are a few significant factors.
"Material" - tells the physics engine what the weapon is made of.
"Hardness" - a numerical value representing how hard a material is compared to other materials; determined by "Material"
"Mass" - how heavy a weapon is; a function of Material, the size of the weapon, and the planet's gravity
"Strength" - how hard the attacker can swing the weapon; based on the creature's musculature and the planet's gravity
"Velocity" - how fast the weapon's "point" is moving relative to the target; a function of Strength, the weapon's Weight, the distance between the Strike Surface and the Grip, and the planet's gravity. Also determines how long the "swing" animation takes (i.e. "cooldown" before the creature returns to a neutral stance, and the weapon can be swung again).
"Point Angle" - the numerical average of all convergent angles that make up a point
"Point Length" - the length of a weapon's stabbing point. A sword would have a very long Point Length; a knife would have a short one. Could be automatically measured, or set by player in the Tech Editor. Only applicable on weapons with Points. Longer Point Length increases damage and chance of Impalement, but also likelihood of a weapon breaking.
"Edge Angle" - the numerical average of three points along the run of an edge; the three points might be determined by player, or automatically generated if a weapon is found/picked up. Narrower Edge Angle = higher damage.

Stabbing damage, i.e. a straight thrust with a pointed object, would primarily use the attacker's "Strength" and "Velocity", and the weapon's "Point Angle" and "Point Length" to determine damage. The weapon's "Hardness" and "Point Length" would then be checked against the blow's "Strength" and "Velocity" and the attacked surface's "Hardness" to see if the weapon will:
A)
1) Penetrate it causing a wound, or glance off harmlessly (if weapon "Hardness" < "Hardness" of surface, and Strength+Velocity are LOW)
2) If it penetrates, the "Point Length" will be checked against the target's Size value (discussed here); if the Point Length is sufficient, the creature may be Impaled and receive greater damage
B) Break upon impact (if Material Hardness < Hardness of the surface, and Strength+Velocity are HIGH)
C) Break after dealing damage (if Material Hardness is numerically close to Hardness of surface when factored with Point Length)
Stabbing attacks have the greatest chance to break the weapon. Velocity should factor exponentially in damage calculation. Therefore, missile/projectile attacks benefit greatly from using Stabbing damage (i.e. arrowheads/bullets).

Slashing damage, i.e. an overhead/sidearm swing with an edged weapon, would primarily use "Strength" and "Velocity" and the weapon's "Mass" and ["Point Length" OR "Edge Angle"] to determine damage. The weapon's "Hardness" would then be checked against the blow's Strength and Velocity, and the attacked material's "Hardness", to see if the weapon will:
A) Penetrate it, causing a wound, or glance off harmlessly (if Material Hardness < Hardness of surface, and Strength+Velocity are LOW)
B) Break upon impact (if Material Hardness of ANY part of weapon < Hardness of surface, and Strength+Velocity are HIGH)
C)
1) (Pointed weapons only) break after dealing damage (if Material Hardness is numerically close to Hardness of surface when factored with Point Length, Strength, & Velocity)
2) (Edged weapons only) Blunt after dealing damage (if Material Hardness is numerically close to Hardness of surface, factored with Strength & Velocity)
Slashing attacks have a greater chance to break if the weapon is a Pointed weapon; Edged Weapons (like axes) can "Blunt". When an Edged weapon "Blunts", its "Edge Angle" is numerically reduced (though the model is unaltered) and the player is notified; if it becomes too "blunt", it will deal Bludgeoning damage instead of Slashing. The player can "Sharpen" metal weapons to restore the edge if the appropriate skills are unlocked (via Research Items like Bronze Working, Iron Working, etc.); Stone weapons cannot be Sharpened.

Bludgeoning damage, i.e. an overhead/sidearm swing with a non-edged weapon, would primarily use "Strength" and "Velocity" and the weapon's "Mass" to determine damage. The weapon's "Hardness" would then be checked against the blow's "Strength" and "Velocity", and the attacked material's "Hardness", to see if the weapon will:
A) Strike it, causing Concussion damage, or glance off harmlessly (if Material Hardness < Hardness of surface, and Strength+Velocity are LOW)
B) Break upon impact (if Material Hardness of ANY part of weapon < Hardness of surface, and Strength+Velocity are HIGH)
Note that Bludgeoning weapons do not pierce their targets' bodies, but cause Concussion damage. Concussion radiates out in a sphere of diminishing damage from point of impact; damage is determined by how close to the sphere's center an organ/bone lies. If an organ/bone receives damage greater than their Hardness, it will break and cease to function. Striking the Brain with a Bludgeoning weapon is, therefore, very effective.
Also, Bludgeoning weapons would be much less likely to break. This is due to their relatively low complexity.
Strength and Velocity factor more highly into Bludgeoning damage than any other type. A big, strong race might be much more likely to favor Bludgeoning damage, given that they would receive a greater benefit from it.

Of course, this is all for weapons, so it's not really related...

Wow that's a complex way of fighting ,but I like it. I had the idea of the paint job and inviorment having an effect on the stealth of the organism.

MassimoV wrote:

Wow that's a complex way of fighting ,but I like it. I had the idea of the paint job and inviorment having an effect on the stealth of the organism.

Paint job? You mean, Thick skin VS thin skin, Rough skin VS smooth skin, or just color? Color wouldn't make much sense, unless you're talking about camoflauge and blending into the environment, another thing you're talking about. That's a whole different story.

Well, as far as primitive organisms' combat goes, i think it would be okay to use the same thing but with their limbs or anything else they could use as a weapon. And to save memory or power or whatever, the strength and type of damage dealt can all be calculated and stored alongside the animations so it just has to recall the event. Can somebody computer-wise tell me if that would work?

Probably. The speed at the end of the limb can be taken into account, thus dealing damage.

roadkillguy wrote:

Probably. The speed at the end of the limb can be taken into account, thus dealing damage.

And for things like jaws or claws? Pressure or strength or something?

We would simply get the part on the end of the limb. Jaws/mouths would be separate, as they can do more than just strike.

I would say jaws would have a strength value, and then we would time the length of the bite based on the strength, doing a specific amount of damage over time.

That's how I would do it.

US_of_Alaska wrote:

roadkillguy wrote:

Probably. The speed at the end of the limb can be taken into account, thus dealing damage.

And for things like jaws or claws? Pressure or strength or something?

And PHYSICS! You can't forget that, or everything will look unrealistic.

Actually, the way it was put before, if it were not for PHYSICS, every one of your attacks would, basically, look the same. There is a way to get your attacks to look otherwise, with the help of PHYSICS, but it'd be much harder both for the programmer and on your computer, by the looks of it.

Noitulove wrote:

US_of_Alaska wrote:

roadkillguy wrote:

Probably. The speed at the end of the limb can be taken into account, thus dealing damage.

And for things like jaws or claws? Pressure or strength or something?

And PHYSICS! You can't forget that, or everything will look unrealistic.

Actually, the way it was put before, if it were not for PHYSICS, every one of your attacks would, basically, look the same. There is a way to get your attacks to look otherwise, with the help of PHYSICS, but it'd be much harder both for the programmer and on your computer, by the looks of it.

Not really needed, but would be nice to have. We can always implement it later.

We will have physics, and if you've ever seen will wright's 2006 demo where the tripod drags the little dead animal around, that's what I want.

Thusly, dead animals should have physics applied to all limbs, while living ones should be buffered & altered animations standing in bounding cubes. Biting or using a dexterous hand will be able to form a joint between it and the dead animal, and will thus allow you to drag. You would be able to do this with any other physics implemented food source/rocks and such.

That's my idea.

roadkillguy wrote:

We will have physics, and if you've ever seen will wright's 2006 demo where the tripod drags the little dead animal around, that's what I want.

Thusly, dead animals should have physics applied to all limbs, while living ones should be buffered & altered animations standing in bounding cubes. Biting or using a dexterous hand will be able to form a joint between it and the dead animal, and will thus allow you to drag. You would be able to do this with any other physics implemented food source/rocks and such.

That's my idea.

Sounds good, Roadkill.

US_of_Alaska wrote:

roadkillguy wrote:

We will have physics, and if you've ever seen will wright's 2006 demo where the tripod drags the little dead animal around, that's what I want.

Thusly, dead animals should have physics applied to all limbs, while living ones should be buffered & altered animations standing in bounding cubes. Biting or using a dexterous hand will be able to form a joint between it and the dead animal, and will thus allow you to drag. You would be able to do this with any other physics implemented food source/rocks and such.

That's my idea.

Sounds good, Roadkill.

Roadkill = dead animal. Unintended pun

i just wanted to no if u will be able to grab an enemy while its living and drown it or something along those lines

Ummm... maybe.

Yeah, we don't want to be too complex or graphic..

Actually, scratch that second part. We don't want to be too complex when it comes to combat.

theres also alot more attacking styles like you could throw or shoot (bow and arrow).

Partydood wrote:

theres also alot more attacking styles like you could throw or shoot (bow and arrow).

Ah, ranged combat. Sadly, I don't think that's been covered yet, though.

By the time We reach ranged combat, I believe your species will be tribal. Thus, it would be primarily RTS styled.

If you've ever played something called TA Spring, you'll know what I mean.

Well, there is still the Org. mode besides the Strategy mode, and organisms could throw rocks and similar things, so we still have to do it.

Off-topic: Spring is great, the best things about it are how many units it can handle and it's Lua system. Unfortunately, everyone plays only Balanced Annihilation mod, the most boring of all of them..

I suppose that's true, but bows & arrows aren't researchable until you can research them.

What I meant was that in spring, you have the option of playing in first person, but you're still restricted to the abilities of an RTS unit. That's the only way I see first person in civ mode.

Off topic: I usually play complete annihilation, not balanced very often.