Limited Stat Combat

[jasonpickering]

Hi guys. I am working on a game which while not an exact Roguelike, has a lot of things in common.

 I am currently working on the combat system and before it was very Binary. Most attacks did 1 damage, with no chance of missing. This made the game seem more like a puzzle then an actual dungeon crawl though. so I am working on combat. All attacks will still do 1 damage, but I am trying to figure out a system for deciding if the attacker hits or misses. My main goal is to keep this simple so the player is not doing a lot of stat management. Some of my options are.

1. All attacks (Player or NPC) have a 10% chance of missing
     + I dont have to show any stats
     - Player has no control over how good they do though

2. Each character has a different stat that is their chance of missing.
     + Player only needs to worry about one stat
     - I don't know how to actually show this in game though. ex: 5, 5/10, a Bar, A rating (Good)
     - You have the same chance to hit all monsters

3. Each character has an Attack Stat these are compared along with a bit of randomization
     + Different chance against different enemies.
     -  having a really high number means you always hit and never get hit

4. The attackers Attack is compared to the Defenders defense along with a bit of randomization.
     + gives the widest variety for enemies. ex: high defense, low offense
     - Player needs to worry about more stats

So what do you think sounds the best. Any other ideas. Any Pros or Cons I might have missed?

[guest509]

  There seems to be a million ways to do it. A set failure rate (10%) would not alter the puzzle like feel. It would be just more of a random puzzle.
 
  If you had an attack rating (you could call it 'skill' or whatever) you could roll a random integer from 0 to the skill rating. Zero is a miss, anything else is a hit. So a kill rating of 1 would be 50% miss (0 = miss, 1 = hit). 2 rating would be 33% miss (0 = miss, 1,2 = Hit). 3 would be 25% miss. 4 would be 20% etc...

  You can make enemies tougher by giving them more HP. No need to add a 'defense' score if you want to keep things stat lite. With just a skill and HP stat you can make a highly skilled enemy with low HP you need to dispatch quickly or be shredded. You can make a super tough zombie with very low skill but tons of HP.

  Just some ideas. Really it depends on how much you want to differentiate the monsters? Some variety of Offense (skill, weapon), Defense (armor, HP, dodge), Movement (speed, evade?) and Special Moves (spells, call for help, etc) are the standard stats. How you handle them is what differentiates your game combat wise.

  Good luck. Nice screen shot.

[jasonpickering]

Thats a good idea about doing the skill that way, Makes the math and coding way Easier. and the player will understand that a Higher number means a better chance, but its never fool proof.

the main stats for enemies will be Skill and HP. but everyone will be special. two examples are Witches attack in a line so killing anything they hit, so you can take out some enemies by lining yourself up. and when you kill a Yeti, all monsters on screen are frozen for 3 turns. in theory a witch could attack you, kill a yeti, and then be frozen.

[guest509]

  Oh cool so it's a lot about positioning. Skill. HP and 'Special'. What about movement? Set stat or just dependent on the behavior of the enemy?

I really like games where the enemies are actually different game play wise and not just scaled up versions of weaker monsters. It happens in WoW a lot. There are only 4 types of monsters really. They are only differentiated by stat bloat. The game is only kept fresh by the player gaining new abilities. The monsters never change.

[jasonpickering]

yeah that's something I didn't want. also there is no real time for stat bloat. the game consists of only 5 of those islands in a row. I once described it as the Roguelike you play while you wait for your other Roguelike to load.

I tried out your idea. I like the percentages it gives.

Attack 1: %50
Attack 2: %33
Attack 3: %25
Attack 4: %21
Attack 5: %17
Attack 6: %15
Attack 7: %13

of course 7 is Probably higher then you will ever get in game, but it works well. Just need to add it in to combat. It should work fine as the 1 in 6 chance now is pretty good.

Edit: so just thinking. is there anyway I could change this to get a Higher Miss percentage then 50?

[Pueo]

I think one of the things that makes your game so charming is the puzzle-element In that sense, I vote for Jo's idea, what with the attack level and such.  I do hope you don't stray too far from the original, I really enjoy playing it now and again

[Z]

I think that hit chance is just a tradition from D&D and is not in any way a necessary element of a good game. There are some games where attacks always hit and I think this design makes them better (DROD, You Only Live Once, Desktop Dungeons, Mage Guild melee IIRC, Hydra Slayer, Hyperbolic Rogue; indeed most of these examples are puzzle-like, but there is nothing wrong about that). It would be alright to have all attacks always hit by default, but have special monsters/weapons/states/whatever which change that.

That's just a general thought, not sure how it applies to your game.

[wire_hall_medic]

For simplicity, I like how it was done in old school action games; say, Zelda III.

You'd do a set amount of damage, which was numerically hidden from the player.  Enemies had hit points, but no armor.  Over the course of the game, your damage would increase a (very) few times, in a way that was intuitively better; you got a better weapon.

If you're making a puzzle game, or it's in real time, you don't need to randomize combat.  In a puzzle game, I'd say it's actively bad; you should never figure out a puzzle, then lose because of bad dice rolls.  If it's an action game, many players feel frustrated when they get into position, swing, and are rewarded with a "You miss!"