Originally posted by Buttermilch

Originally posted by CactusmanX

This for melee and this for ranged

Impractical in a MMO setting? Probably but I still think it would be the ideal combat system

Well, the Gears of War 2 style (FPS-combat basically) can work and it already does (Neocron 2, Global Agenda...).

But your proposal for melee combat (Batman: Arkham Asylum) could be done maybe, but you would really have to cut the ragdoll-thingie, because it wouldn't run with todays technology (takes up too much traffic).

Ragdoll is local and takes up zero bandwidth.  Only bad implementations would require significant amounts of server traffic.

Slow-motion is the biggest obstacle.  It accounts for a large chunk of why Batman's combat feels so "right" to players.  While I suppose you can do localized spheres of slow-mo, in general slow motion is very hard to pull off well in a multiplayer game.

In reply to OP, I enjoy any combat system done well but voted for FPS mostly because I want to see more MMOFPSes.

MMORPGs, I want non-auto-attack.  Although in terms of the actual implementations of combat systems on the market, WOW's is most enjoyable, despite auto-attack, due to all the other factors WOW gets right.

My tastes change. Its a strange cycle I can't predict.

I prefer fun and functioning combat systems to boring non-functioning combat systems. If you have fun, who cares?

---

Originally posted by Zorgo
I prefer fun and functioning combat systems to boring non-functioning combat systems. If you have fun, who cares?

---

Exactly. I could have picked any number of combat types from the poll and been happy with either one as long as they are FUN and fit the game I'm playing.

That being said, I do find WoW combat very fluid and fun and mixing that with FFXIs combat, the skill chains, etc. would be awesome.

Mount&blade/Gothic series/Risen: aim your attack, dont let your sleep in while playing as other rpgs, makes you wanna go kill random mobs to try diferent combinations with weapons and how your aproach the enemy and use cover/terrain as your advantage.

Originally posted by brostyn

DDO is my favorite style, but I also like the WoW style(btw, I think DAoC had that style before WoW).

While I really don't mind DDO style all that much, I will say that it really kills much beyond mindless hack and slash combat.  You're so busy wildly clicking that you don't have time to set up special moves or abilities in the heat of combat.

Wow style

It is fun with so much depth

- different types of resource managment

- CD abilities

- procs

- buffs & debuffs

- different form of CCs (admitted used less in PvE than pvP)

....

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Wow style

It is fun with so much depth

- different types of resource managment

- CD abilities

- procs

- buffs & debuffs

- different form of CCs (admitted used less in PvE than pvP)

....

How is that WoW style? That's the same combat that's been used in MMOs since 1999. 

And WoW's version of it is far from deep. 

I prefer DAoC style, turn based, but feels kinetic with good animations, sound effects, and a huge depth of skills to use. 

Second to that, Darkfall. 

There are two types of game 'experiences' I like.

1. is basically a virtual world experience. Looking over the sholder of my toon is not a virtual world. I perfer 1st person, FPS type interaction when it comes to that type of game.

2. stradegy turnbased experience. Top down view (turned based perfered). Slient Storm is the only turned based top down game that I feel was done exactly how old pen and paper RPG's did combat and I love it.

Originally posted by Axehilt

Ragdoll is local and takes up zero bandwidth.  Only bad implementations would require significant amounts of server traffic.

Wrong. As seen in "Badman: Arkham Asylum" the enemies just stand up where they fell. So you would need to have synchronised positions for all "kicked away" enemies -> takes up a lot of traffic.

If they only fall ragdoll wise when they die? Yes, it is possible, as already seen in Mortal Online.

Originally posted by Garvon3

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Wow style

It is fun with so much depth

- different types of resource managment

- CD abilities

- procs

- buffs & debuffs

- different form of CCs (admitted used less in PvE than pvP)

....

How is that WoW style? That's the same combat that's been used in MMOs since 1999. 

And WoW's version of it is far from deep. 

 

I prefer DAoC style, turn based, but feels kinetic with good animations, sound effects, and a huge depth of skills to use. 

Second to that, Darkfall. 

it is way deeper than say EQ. Just take resource management. Wow has mana (which every game has), rage, energy, runes, combo points .. and all act differently and encourage different style of gameplay.

Originally posted by Buttermilch

Originally posted by Axehilt

Ragdoll is local and takes up zero bandwidth.  Only bad implementations would require significant amounts of server traffic.

Wrong. As seen in "Badman: Arkham Asylum" the enemies just stand up where they fell. So you would need to have synchronised positions for all "kicked away" enemies -> takes up a lot of traffic.

If they only fall ragdoll wise when they die? Yes, it is possible, as already seen in Mortal Online.

And if ragdoll-to-standup-pose was any significant part of why Batman's combat is awesome, you might have a point.  But you could remove that from Batman entirely (and have canned or simplified knockback animations) and the game would still have amazing combat.

AoC's melee combat is great, probably the best I've played in an mmo game setting. For a total combat system in an mmo I really like Guild War's skill system. It combines a lot of tactical knowledge and creativity (if you don't rely on PvX for all of your builds).

Originally posted by Varny

The kind that is good.

Gears of War has good shooting mechanics but Tabula Rasa and all the others did not.

World of Warcraft has the best combat for that traditional style but Everquest 2 does not.

 

Not really the type of combat but just one that is well made.

Tabula Rasa was not FPS combat... it was much closer to standard tab-targeting Auto Attack+ Styles combat... or Soft-lock Console Action game combat if you will...

Also that is YOUR opinion... I actually liked the TR combat... and I prefer the rotational Style System in EQ/EQ2 to the 1 Button Mash "Frostbolt, Frostbolt, Frostbolt" Experience that WoW offers...

and I bet there's quite a few others that agree...

@ OP

Could you please call the "WoW Style" combat the "Everquest Style" Combat? It's basically the same and EQ was there first so it has dibs :P

I personally prefer the EverQuest Style... Just feels right for me... But I can pretty much adept to and enjoy other styles as well as long as they require a certain level of skill in both PvE and PvP...

wow, i'm shocked that around %46 on this RPG forum chose FPS type combat (combine Spellborn and Darkfall in with the "FPS" choice, as should have been done).

Eve isnt autoatack only. Some people are ignorant i see.(unless they play missile boats with passive shield recharge thats indeed no skill and autoatack mostly)

Oh..what is the difference between Darfall and FPS/TPS combat system?

Originally posted by eLdritchZ

@ OP

Could you please call the "WoW Style" combat the "Everquest Style" Combat? It's basically the same and EQ was there first so it has dibs :P

I could, but I used "WoW" as a term because more people know it and are aware on how this system works.

Originally posted by Gdemami

Oh..what is the difference between Darfall and FPS/TPS combat system?

In Darkfall melee combat you don't have a crosshair. You just need to roughly aim. It's a slight difference, but it is one. ;-)

---

Originally posted by Buttermilch

In Darkfall melee combat you don't have a crosshair. You just need to roughly aim. It's a slight difference, but it is one. ;-)

---

Dot on screen is just a cosmetics.