Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Liamar]

Reading through the combat logs I noticed that AI attacks teeth and toes a lot... That makes little sense. The suggestion to improve it comes with two points:

1.) Make AI aim at larger regions as in at a hand or arm, not a finger.

2.) If the attack misses the intended target, it should have a chance to hit another object. As in the creature aims at a hand, but misses, and instead hits the thumb, cutting it off. And if the attacker is particularly unskilled AND clumsy, they overswing and hit their own leg instead.

[SixOfSpades]

"Move the target up the limb to hit more meaningful targets" is a good idea, but taken to its conclusion, this would lead to all of the AI's attacks being aimed at the head--to the point that if you wanted to, you could run around buck naked except for a helmet, and still be almost as well-protected as if you were fully-clad in steel plate and chain. It would be better if the AI knew multiple effective targeting systems, with attackers choosing them (or even switching back & forth mid-fight) as appropriate to combat conditions and their own intelligence. Also, as a bit of two-birds-one-stone bonus, this could do double duty as another method of cultural differentiation, where one civilization knows these five combat styles while another civ has a different set of six. Combat techniques could be procedurally chosen so that each civ has (at least) one style for unarmored enemies (& animals), one for armored foes, one non-lethal style for taking captives & subduing criminals, etc.

[MrWiggles]

The other issue, is that the combat system has to be morphology agonstic as possible.  You can put a creature with any number of limbs, heads, fingers, toes or teeth. Otherwise the combat system wouldnt be able to work against Fluffy Womblers which dont have anything but a central fluff to attack.

To fix this, would probably need to have a embed each body part with a some sorta priorty number, but that might lead to everybody just attacking the head again or similarly flatting all combat so folks only attack one region of a body.

[Bumber]

I think the difficultly of strike is taken into account when targeting. They prioritize the head of an unconscious foe because all locations become guaranteed hits.

I'm not sure what anyone thinks targeting only the head has anything to do with the OP's suggestion. (To begin with, the upper body is the root of a DF body, not the head.) He's saying that attacks to teeth, fingers, etc., should work the same way as hitting internal organs works right now.

[SixOfSpades]

He's saying that attacks to teeth, fingers, etc., should work the same way as hitting internal organs works right now.

No, he didn't. He said, "Make AI aim at larger regions as in at a hand or arm, not a finger." As in, "Don't waste time trying to land attacks that, even if successful, will not effectively increase my odds of victory."

They prioritize the head of an unconscious foe because all locations become guaranteed hits.

Which I learned, to my chagrin, at the same time that I learned that silver warhammers do jack against an iron helm. My Hammerdwarves could have turned those unconscious goblins' entire torsos into pulpy mush, but instead they exhausted themselves pounding away at the one target that was effectively invincible. Hence, the importance of being smart enough to switch combat styles in mid-fight.

The other issue, is that the combat system has to be morphology agonstic as possible.  You can put a creature with any number of limbs, heads, fingers, toes or teeth. . . . [You] would probably need to have a embed each body part with a some sorta priorty number, but that might lead to everybody just attacking the head again or similarly flatting all combat so folks only attack one region of a body.

True, there needs to be a "general" layer of strategy, the goal of the combat style, and then below that a layer of which specific body parts (ideally, for each type of enemy) would be valid targets for that particular style. Something vaguely like:

I. Goal of combat style
     A. Target areas to attack
          1. Types of attack to use

I. Negate opponent's offensive abilities
     A. Weapons, weapon hand, weapon arm
          1. (Weapon itself) Any blunt or heavy slashing weapon of your own, to either damage the target weapon, or knock it out of the opponent's hand.
          2. (Weapon hand) Again, any slashing (if hand is unarmored) or blunt (doesn't matter) attack. Also piercing weapons, if hand is unarmored, with attempt to embed your weapon in the hand & then use it to shake the hand around. If unarmed, grapple the hand, especially if your forces (in the immediate area) outnumber the enemy.
          3. (Weapon arm) Select target of upper arm or lower arm (and hand, too) based on the type of armor (if any) over each part, vs. your weapon (if any). Grappling still an effective strategy, if you have friends nearby.
     B. Clawed foot, clawed leg
          1. If armed with blunt weapon, attack whatever part of the limb seems least armored, with the goal of breaking at least enough bone to make the leg/claws too painful to use.
          2. If armed with slashing or piercing weapon, attack whatever part of the leg (not the foot) seems least armored, with the goal of severing important nerves or tendons.
     C. Jawbone
          1. If armed with blunt weapon, attack, with goal of breaking bone & rendering the creature unable to bite.
     D. Horns, antlers
          1. If horn/antler is narrow enough, attack with blunt or heavy slashing weapon in an attempt to break it.
     E. Eyes
          1. If armed with small weapon (dagger), try to stab in enemy's eye. If armed with larger weapon and combat closes to grappling range (making large weapons unwieldy), consider dropping weapon & jabbing finger/thumb into enemy's eye.
     F. Etc., etc.
II. Negate opponent's defensive abilities
     A. Shield, shield hand, shield arm
          1. Ways to force opponent to drop shield
     B. Helmet / neck
          1. If armed with a small weapon, close to grapple range, grab their head/helmet, & expose the throat. Bring weapon to throat & issue threat.
     C. Etc.
III. Negate opponent's capacity for movement
     A. Legs
          1. If armed with whip, net, or bola, attack to attempt to entangle ambulatory limbs / entire body.
          2. If armed with melee weapon, attack legs to damage bones/tendons & immobilize enemy. Then, back out of enemy's attack range & finish them off with spears or ranged weapons.
IV. Stun opponent
     A. Skull
          1. Bad blow to the head, etc.
     B. Spine, upper arms, upper legs
          1. A good hit to the spine can also temporarily disable the whole central nervous system, as can breaking bones at the hip or shoulder (shock).
     C. Throat
          1. Strangulation to loss of consciousness
VI. Kill opponent
     A. Brain
          1. Piercing or blunt weapons, etc.
     B. Heart
          1. Piercing weapons only.
     C. Lungs
          1. Piercing weapons only.
     D. Throat
          1. Piercing or slashing weapons, strangulation.

Etc., etc., you get the idea. Dozens of different "If the enemy creature has X, and you've got Y weapon, attempt to do Z" strategies could be made--or even a functionally infinite amount could be procedurally generated.

[Bumber]

He's saying that attacks to teeth, fingers, etc., should work the same way as hitting internal organs works right now.

No, he didn't. He said, "Make AI aim at larger regions as in at a hand or arm, not a finger." As in, "Don't waste time trying to land attacks that, even if successful, will not effectively increase my odds of victory."

I think you're reading way too much into that, considering it's followed by "As in the creature aims at a hand, but misses, and instead hits the thumb, cutting it off." in the second point.

Why does "larger regions" imply only attacks that increase odds of victory? Surely it means "only attack the largest body parts", right?

They prioritize the head of an unconscious foe because all locations become guaranteed hits.

Which I learned, to my chagrin, at the same time that I learned that silver warhammers do jack against an iron helm. My Hammerdwarves could have turned those unconscious goblins' entire torsos into pulpy mush, but instead they exhausted themselves pounding away at the one target that was effectively invincible. Hence, the importance of being smart enough to switch combat styles in mid-fight.

Aren't they supposed to wrestle the helmets off since that one update?

[SixOfSpades]

I think you're reading way too much into that, considering it's followed by "As in the creature aims at a hand, but misses, and instead hits the thumb, cutting it off." in the second point.
Why does "larger regions" imply only attacks that increase odds of victory? Surely it means "only attack the largest body parts", right?

Well, the OP doesn't seem to want to return and clarify what, precisely, he meant . . . so why don't you clarify what you meant, when you said that "attacks to teeth, fingers, etc., should work the same way as hitting internal organs works right now"? Was it anything like "Any attack that misses its intended target should have a chance to hit adjacent parts instead?"

As for "Make AI aim at larger regions as in at a hand or arm, not a finger," I don't think "larger" is the most operative word. Yes, hands & arms are larger than fingers, but that's not the reason that they make better targets.

Aren't they supposed to wrestle the helmets off since that one update?

I believe so--which is an excellent example of switching combat techniques in mid-fight.

[Bumber]

Well, the OP doesn't seem to want to return and clarify what, precisely, he meant . . . so why don't you clarify what you meant, when you said that "attacks to teeth, fingers, etc., should work the same way as hitting internal organs works right now"? Was it anything like "Any attack that misses its intended target should have a chance to hit adjacent parts instead?"

Something like that. I'd describe fingers as "part of" the hand, rather than "adjacent". The AI would only aim at hands instead of fingers, head instead of teeth, but may hit fingers or teeth in the course of doing so. I'm not sure targeting the arm should allow you to hit the hand (or vise-versa,) although the OP seems to think so, going as far as hitting yourself.

I think the player should still be able to aim at fingers (and additionally heart and lungs,) but they should be put in a sub-menu to avoid the clutter we have now. I suppose aiming at fingers should allow you to hit the hand, but you have a higher chance off missing altogether.

As for "Make AI aim at larger regions as in at a hand or arm, not a finger," I don't think "larger" is the most operative word. Yes, hands & arms are larger than fingers, but that's not the reason that they make better targets.

It's part of the reason. I'm pretty sure part size modifies accuracy. In the current system, you hit the finger or nothing.

[Liamar]

RE: Hitting oneself and critical misses. Having practiced longsword fighting what you intend to hit and what you end up hitting can vary wildly, even in case of experienced fighters. Even hitting oneself is not impossible, quite common in fact in case of noobs, especially armchair edgelords who never held a sword before and attempt some ridiculous physically impossible embellishments like spins and other such nonsense. It's even common for people to impale themselves on their opponents weapon without those opponents having an intention to or doing anything to attack.

Bottom line:

AI should target larger areas instead of specifically top, back teeth. Primarily for the purpose of increasing attacks on crucial targets like heads, limbs and torso. Secondarily just because it makes sense and is more realistic.

A swing should usually hit something unless specifically dodged instead of just being either a hit on the specific targeted part (like teeth) or a complete miss, with relatively high possibility of missing the target but still hitting something else.