How does health and armour work?



  • Im just wondering how armour and health work in the game? By this I mean, does the heavily armoured knight simply just have a higher amount of health opposed to the other classes, or do all classes have the same amount of health with armour advantages?

    As an example for what I mean by the armour advantages, the heavily armoured knight would have an advantage over a light armoured soldier because when hit, there’s less chance of critcal damage being done depending on where the hit was placed and the ‘momentum’ the player had. So if the incoming strike hit the knights breastplate, only limited damage may be dealt dependant on the weapon; whereas if struck/shot in a weak spot, more critical damage may be dealt, i.e. chain mail weak spots for archers to aim for with bodkin arrows (bodkins arrows as an example). Whereas blunt weapons such as maces would be more effective against such armour due to the trauma a blow can leave, damaging internal organs even if the weapon didn’t penetrate the armour.

    Or do you go about dealing with armour and damage in a different way, such as each hit box having armour bonuses or something, i’d very much like to know how this currently works.

    Scorp



  • Hi Scorp,

    Each class is assigned an individual Armour value, this value essentially represents how much damage a class can withstand from a particular attack. There are a number of body parts which all have modifiers too, the head, neck, arms, legs, and torso. Each attack is also assigned a base value before modifiers are applied. All classes start with 100 health.

    Age of Chivalry takes all the numbers and uses this formula to calculate the damage dealt:

    Base attack damage * ((100 - Armour value) / 100) * Location

    Crusader Stab vs Crusader Torso for example:

    100 * 0.7 * 1.0 = 70 damage

    The system for Chivalry: Battle for Agatha is currently still in development and has not been finalised just yet, and so everything is always subject to change; what I will say though, is that it will be far more complex than Age of Chivalry and will aim to recognise each class’ type of armour and apply damage far more realistically. With more modifiers available for us to tweak than Age of Chivalry, the system will provide many more options to get balance perfect, as well as reward intelligent players for choosing the right weapon in the heat of the moment when it matters most.



  • Just one armor value ? Sounds really simple, and not that realistic. Also, no complexity in weapon’s strikes and no ‘universal’ damage rules are strange choices.



  • @UrLukur:

    Just one armor value ? Sounds really simple, and not that realistic. Also, no complexity in weapon’s strikes and no ‘universal’ damage rules are strange choices.

    Age of Chivalry was not very realistic in that sense no; Chivalry: Battle for Agatha however will contain a much more complex damage system.



  • Introducing some kind of complexity is nearly always good choice.

    I have question, do you plan to use ‘just’ health bar and stamina bar, or you plan to expand into bleeding system, stun system, adrenaline system and complex in game wound system ?



  • @Blaine:

    Hi Scorp,

    Each class is assigned an individual Armour value, this value essentially represents how much damage a class can withstand from a particular attack. There are a number of body parts which all have modifiers too, the head, neck, arms, legs, and torso. Each attack is also assigned a base value before modifiers are applied. All classes start with 100 health.

    Age of Chivalry takes all the numbers and uses this formula to calculate the damage dealt:

    Base attack damage * ((100 - Armour value) / 100) * Location

    Crusader Stab vs Crusader Torso for example:

    100 * 0.7 * 1.0 = 70 damage

    The system for Chivalry: Battle for Agatha is currently still in development and has not been finalised just yet, and so everything is always subject to change; what I will say though, is that it will be far more complex than Age of Chivalry and will aim to recognise each class’ type of armour and apply damage far more realistically. With more modifiers available for us to tweak than Age of Chivalry, the system will provide many more options to get balance perfect, as well as reward intelligent players for choosing the right weapon in the heat of the moment when it matters most.

    Thanks for clearing this up for me, I look inforward to seeing this new system for game in action, which seems very appropriate for the game.



  • @Blaine:

    reward intelligent players for choosing the right weapon in the heat of the moment when it matters most.

    I hope it meant ‘reward for using your weapon in the right way’ than paper-rock-scissor balance.



  • the “rock-paper-scissors” operation you’re referring to is what he’s trying to get across, that if you use a certain type of weapon agenst a certain type of armor, it will be better than using a different type of weapon agenst that same type of armor, thus adding an element of complexity to a melee game style. Instead of just using one type of weapon agenst everything.



  • @Vox:

    the “rock-paper-scissors” operation you’re referring to is what he’s trying to get across, that if you use a certain type of weapon agenst a certain type of armor, it will be better than using a different type of weapon agenst that same type of armor, thus adding an element of complexity to a melee game style. Instead of just using one type of weapon agenst everything.

    Sure, but R-P-S remind to not go overboard with it. It means that you are shafted if you have rock and you fight against paper (no matter how you fight, you are massively disadvantaged) which is just plain wrong way to balance things out.

    Also, different weapons should be aimed at different spots in certain way to be most effective (basing on the opposing player armor and general rules of usage of certain weapon).



  • it’s not that this beats that no matter what, it’s this is better than that agenst such and such. you can still fight at a disadvantage and win, just you’ll be at a disadvantage, and no one likes that :)



  • @Vox:

    it’s not that this beats that no matter what, it’s this is better than that agenst such and such. you can still fight at a disadvantage and win, just you’ll be at a disadvantage, and no one likes that :)

    P-R-S means pretty massive disadvantage.



  • wat



  • @UrLukur:

    @Vox:

    the “rock-paper-scissors” operation you’re referring to is what he’s trying to get across, that if you use a certain type of weapon agenst a certain type of armor, it will be better than using a different type of weapon agenst that same type of armor, thus adding an element of complexity to a melee game style. Instead of just using one type of weapon agenst everything.

    Sure, but R-P-S remind to not go overboard with it. It means that you are shafted if you have rock and you fight against paper (no matter how you fight, you are massively disadvantaged) which is just plain wrong way to balance things out.

    Also, different weapons should be aimed at different spots in certain way to be most effective (basing on the opposing player armor and general rules of usage of certain weapon).

    You have the option of selecting which primary weapons and which secondary weapons you wish to take into battle with you. If you end up taking two types of swords, then you’ll be disadvantaged in that sense since you didn’t choose any throwables or different weapon types such as maces. It’s all down to player decision and adapting to the situation, there is no rock-paper-scissors - you are not forced to fight with a disadvantage.



  • @Blaine:

    You have the option of selecting which primary weapons and which secondary weapons you wish to take into battle with you. If you end up taking two types of swords, then you’ll be disadvantaged in that sense since you didn’t choose any throwables or different weapon types such as maces. It’s all down to player decision, there is no rock-paper-scissors - you are not forced to fight with a disadvantage.

    1h Swords are pretty good weapons that handle most battlefield situations quite well, especially coupled with shields. They are good secondary weapons, problem with them lies in cost of good sword and slight lack of punch. First seems to be moot, second can be avoided using it in the right way. Oh, they are also not so good support weapons, spears (and other polearms) are better in this role. Main problem is that sword user have nothing against ranged at range.



  • what Blaine is saying is that you have to adapt to situations, using different types of weapons agenst the proper type of armor to maximize the amount of damage you do, or taking a throwing weapon with you to give you some range.



  • @Vox:

    what Blaine is saying is that you have to adapt to situations, using different types of weapons agenst the proper type of armor to maximize the amount of damage you do, or taking a throwing weapon with you to give you some range.

    Armor is not something that protect all areas of body in the same way, armors are often mix of different armors worn under each other, and intelligent hitting different areas of body should be rewarded. I would love to see some complex system instead very simple system where you have to change weapon to deal different armor types.



  • please, go read up on how they used armor, and go learn how to make a game, then start posting about how to improve the game, thank you



  • @Vox:

    please, go read up on how they used armor, and go learn how to make a game, then start posting about how to improve the game, thank you

    I kinda love it when good threads go bad.

    And rock, paper, scissors, is easy. Nothing beats rock.

    Rock is the warhammer, right?



  • Does this mean that a peasant with a one handed sword will never beat a fully armoured knight with a two hander, instead of it just being really difficult? I enjoy that sort of challenge usually :(



  • Why isn’t Blaine’s name red anymore? D:


Log in to reply