The "Panic Parry" Mechanic is Bad




  • Figure 1 - Chiv Combat Flow (Current)

    The (X)'s indicate restrictions:

    Technically, these (X)'s result in new states - so the actual flow diagram of combat looks like this:


    Figure 2 - Chiv Combat Flow (Current - Extended)

    It is much easier to read the first one, but it’s important to see the system for what it is. Because of these restrictions, there are 3 different wind-ups, 2 different parries, and 2 different feint states.

    Notice that the “Panic Parry” blue line is essentially a substitute for the ‘combo > feint > parry’ string, allowing a way to bypass attack recovery - except you can’t riposte from it.

    PROBLEMS WITH PANIC PARRY

    It provides a skill-less route to bypass attack recovery.

    It is one-directional.

    It’s confusing.

    But what if we simplified Figure 1/2? What if we removed all the restrictions and the panic parry line? We would get this:


    Figure 3 - Chiv Combat Flow (Simple)

    This is a complete view. In this world there is only one kind of wind-up state, one parry state, and one feint state. Seems a little more intuitive. Maybe even elegant?

    This system offers no restriction, and the maximum possible options. It provides more complex pathways which allows for more depth of combat and is the vision of why Chivalry was so great to me. It has avenues for experimentation, differing play-styles, and mind-games.

    Why have there been more and more (X)'s added to the fighting system over time? They seem to be put in place to prevent actions that are deemed “exploitative”. But in doing this it complicates the system in an arbitrarily bad way and restricts the freedom of the player…

    Design your combat system to be simple, elegant, and intuitive and nothing else really matters.
    Strive so that each mechanic is orthogonal and covers a large amount of game play space and the game will be fun and interesting.

    FURTHER THOUGHTS

    One question I wanted to bring up is,

    Why can I feint-to-parry after an attack, but if I combo an attack I can’t do it?

    Chivalry is a complex game. But, I feel that if the mechanics and state system is designed in a simple and intuitive way, then balancing is just a matter of getting the numbers right (state window times, weapon damage, weapon length, stamina costs, etc…). But the approach taken currently seems to be ‘I can balance the game If I adjust and limit the way a player can play my game’. Sure, you may be able to get closer to a balanced game by removing certain actions by the player because it minimizes the possible permutations of the game state - but that is not the right way.

    For example, if you consider the ancient chinese game “Go”, the rules are extremely simple. And because of this, the game is considered by many to be one of the greatest games ever created. And it’s because of the beauty that can happen as two players play it. There are a HUGE amount of possible states of that game, and tons of potential for intelligent minds to be challenged and improved by exploring the interesting space that “Go” offers. Chivalry doesn’t have to be designed as simply as “Go”, but I think that striving for a more elegant rule-set can only make a game more beautiful and interesting in that way.



  • A lot of the recent changes do seem to make the system more complex, but complex an unnecessary way…convoluted even. I do enjoy simple and elegant systems.



  • The “panic parry” is bullshit. Yet TBS is to naive to attempt changes.
    Sorry but something like a missed strike NEEDS to be a punishment.
    Hell if you make combo spam or missed attacks to be secure with a defensive option (speak you simply wont be punished for missing), then make feints all 100% readable. And fix draging. At least balance the game everywhere out instead of leaving something completly out of place.
    Jesus just fucking do something the right way TBS. Please avoid implenting your own ideas on things no one wanted to be changed in first place. Because they are absolute bullshit.

    I want it simple and straight: You missed? Oh thats my chance to punish you.



  • Well written.



  • Very good post. +1

    ! I doubt the majority of forum users can read a flowchart though, sadly.



  • Yeah I’m fine with removing panic parry. They added this as an attempt to appease the people who used combo feint to parry to by pass recovery, but didn’t realize that it does nothing of the sort. I vote remove panic parry, and make us bare back it. If we do a dumb attack, well then by all means hit me in the face with your sword. :D



  • You forgot to include Combo parry into your flow chart. It is not the same as panic parry and you don’t go into recovery before you parry from this. There is less stamina from using a combo parry than a panic parry. Include this into your flowchart please.



  • There is a mistake in the chart. The blue line should be connected to attack-recovery, and there needs to be a color-line for combo-parry, stemming off of where the blue line used to be in the first place (and pointed to the Parry state).

    While the simplified version may be more elegant (Chart 3, which shows an attempt to bring back CFtP), that elegancy is causing the problem. What is the problem, you might ask?

    The problem is being able to simultaneously have both an aggressive and defensive stance. The question you should be asking yourself, instead, is how can we separate those stances more elegantly than the solution that was implemented?



  • @ŠïN:

    You forgot to include Combo parry into your flow chart. It is not the same as panic parry and you don’t go into recovery before you parry from this. There is less stamina from using a combo parry than a panic parry. Include this into your flowchart please.

    Thank you, Sin. I’ve updated the charts.



  • @NoVaLombardia:

    There is a mistake in the chart.

    While the simplified version may be more elegant (Chart 3, which shows an attempt to bring back CFtP), that elegancy is causing the problem. What is the problem, you might ask?

    The severe lack of brown lines.

    Absolutely.



  • @NoVaLombardia:

    There is a mistake in the chart. The blue line should be connected to attack-recovery, and there needs to be a color-line for combo-parry, stemming off of where the blue line used to be in the first place (and pointed to the Parry state).

    Thank you. I’ve updated the charts.

    @NoVaLombardia:

    While the simplified version may be more elegant (Chart 3, which shows an attempt to bring back CFtP), that elegancy is causing the problem. What is the problem, you might ask?

    The problem is being able to simultaneously have both an aggressive and defensive stance. The question you should be asking yourself, instead, is how can we separate those stances more elegantly than the solution that was implemented?

    Right. But I don’t feel like this is a problem. You are either attacking to deal damage or parrying/blocking to negate it. I realize that the Combo > Feint > Parry string is very powerful in fights - allowing both attacks to string out and being able to parry if needed, but I don’t think it is a problem, especially since every player has the same ability and it uses your stamina pool appropriately. To hit a player that uses Combo > Feint > Parry, it comes down to hitting them during or right after their active attack window or making them miss-time the parry with a feint or drag.



  • @chrisomatic:

    Thank you, Sin. I’ve updated the charts.

    Combo-parry should not be a separate state, and should not be pointing toward rest. You are able to riposte off of it, so it functions like a regular parry.

    EDIT: Actually, it is a combo… so it should share a green line, but you should point a green line directly to parry.



  • @NoVaLombardia:

    @chrisomatic:

    Thank you, Sin. I’ve updated the charts.

    Combo-parry should not be a separate state, and should not be pointing toward rest. You are able to riposte off of it, so it functions like a regular parry.

    I tested this. I tried to riposte off of combo-parry, and I don’t think you can. I could be wrong though.



  • nice flowchart. now spell riposte correctly and you woulnd’t look like a high-school student that just came out of math class or something.

    yeah, i’m like that.

    combo parry? what’s that?



  • @chrisomatic:

    Right. But I don’t feel like this is a problem… especially since every player has the same ability and it uses your stamina pool appropriately.

    Yes, every player had the same option to use this.

    Because the option of CFtP existed, the only viable option in fights was to always combo… you don’t feel that this isn’t overpowered? Something can be considered overpowered if one option completely overshadows any other option (comboing – which was caused by CFtP being an option).

    Since ONE option (comboing) was the only viable option, then that makes combat ONE-dimensional, no?

    To hit a player that uses Combo > Feint > Parry, it comes down to hitting them during or right after their active attack window or making them miss-time the parry with a feint or drag.

    And with the current system in play, this is also true, but now you are allowed to get in to a position (getting in close enough) to where you can attempt ANOTHER option, because you have an inherit weakness –> a recovery time (sacrificing your offensive stance) in order to be allowed to block.

    The strike through shows an invalid claim. Since TBS added support to be able to press one button for both feint and parry, that was no longer the case. Well, the case always existed for those who used a macro.



  • @Deadpan:

    nice flowchart. now spell riposte correctly and you woulnd’t look like a high-school student that just came out of math class or something.

    yeah, i’m like that.

    combo parry? what’s that?

    Yeah, I realized I was spelling it wrong and corrected it. Silly mistake. :?
    A combo parry is when you queue a parry during your attack(active). It allows you to combo into a parry, and acts as a combo-ender.



  • @chrisomatic:

    I tested this. I tried to riposte off of combo-parry, and I don’t think you can. I could be wrong though.

    If that’s the case, then it is a bug. It specifically says in their patch notes that you are able to riposte off of it.



  • Design your combat system to be simple, elegant, and intuitive and nothing else really matters.

    One other thing does matter; the intuitive paths have to actually be USEFUL, or else they are artificial newb traps that drive players away from the game. For a commercial video game that is, first and foremost, meant to be fun, getting rid of newb traps is worth giving up some simplicity and elegance.

    For example, in figure 3, the intuitive way to get from attack-active to parry is via attack-active>recovery>rest>parry. We all know that path is terrible because you will likely get hit in that time if the enemy MAA dodged or backed away suddenly. The viable way to get to parry is via attack-active>combo-windup>feint>parry. Not at all intuitive or easy for a newer player, because that takes 3 inputs instead of 1, and one of those inputs is an ATTACK command when all you want to do is DEFEND as fast as possible. This adds a lot of artificial mechanical skill required to be competitive in this game, and there’s already so much skill required (aiming and timing parries, countering feints, footwork, general awareness) that TB would be shooting themselves in the foot to keep piling even more on top of it all. The community would continue shrinking and suffering if TB didn’t make the changes they did.

    Restrictions are not all bad either; they can remove abuse cases or add unique properties to an action. In figure 3, why would you ever go to attack-recovery when everything you ever needed was available from combo-feint? Disallowing parries after combo-feints makes comboing a major decision point, and that adds depth and skill to the game in more natural manner. Disallowing feints during a riposte helps define a riposte and allows TB to add even more speed to it and still have other options remain viable. The whole purpose of a riposte is to be a sudden attack that can succeed just based on it’s surprise, without needing any other tricks.

    I agree that parry out of recovery should allow ripostes though. You should take a look at my idea http://www.chivalrythegame.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=15792&start=139 to try and fix the current problems with panic and combo parries.



  • Hmm my post didn’t show up. I also said that there was a mistake regarding the blue line coming coming from attack instead of recovery.

    Pretty much whether it stays or goes depends on whether…

    People want to get hit in the face

    Or

    People want to lose a shit ton of stamina, then get hit in the face.



  • Except that you don’t always parry in recovery just from panics. You can use skill to plan it that way sometimes.


Log in to reply