Combat Realism Model

[Sqeecoo]

So what do you guys think of Ron Losey's Combat Realism Model? (used by most major mods now, for instance Onin No Ran: http://mbx.streetofeyes.com/index.php/topic,250.0.html).

It does make combat feel more dangerous (EDIT: until you get good armor and become immortal), but perhaps not balanced, really. Anyway, I don't see some of the knowledgeable people who post here (Aqtai, Archonsod, Raz, Damien, to name some, but not all  ) posting on the mod forums, and I would be interested in your opinion on Ron's model. Is it really realistic?

Thanks!

[Kissaki]

I don't know all the specifics about it, but from what I've read it has some balance issues. I have also had some fundamental disagreements with Ron, but the biggest issue IMO stems from trying too vigorously for realism. This is because there are some very specific and crucual elements of real combat which so far is not possible to implement in M&B, and pouring realism into the elements that are present in the game will usually do more harm than good. For example, at present it is possible to kill a man in plate armour with a sword, cutting him down. This would be quite impossible in real life. But this does not mean the sword is useless against plate in real life -- there are other ways of using the sword. These ways, however, are not present in the game. I am speaking of half-swording and grappling. A sword was not useless in real life, and so it should not be useless in the game either. But certain unrealisms must exist to balance out other unrealisms. Because the sword cannot be half-sworded in M&B, we must allow it to defeat armour with standard cuts and thrusts. As I understand it, Ron's system makes you absolutely impervious to many weapons if your armour rating is high enough. I salute the effort, but I have serious reservations.

[Ingolifs]

I think the idea is in the right direction, but Ron Losey took things a bit too far with it. I tried out a Native version of the realism mod, with any type of plate armour, you become impervious to the efforts of low class soldiers. I attacked some vaegir veterans, rode around either doing no damage at all or annihilating them on the spot. Eventually my horse was cut from under me, and I had to face a bunch of them on foot. They quickly mobbed me, but due to some extremem patience i managed to either block or shrug off most of their hits and kill them one by one.

Now in any realistic scenario, I would've been rugby-tackled down, and would have sharp things inserted into my armpits.

[jpgray]

I think the idea is in the right direction, but Ron Losey took things a bit too far with it. I tried out a Native version of the realism mod, with any type of plate armour, you become impervious to the efforts of low class soldiers. I attacked some vaegir veterans, rode around either doing no damage at all or annihilating them on the spot. Eventually my horse was cut from under me, and I had to face a bunch of them on foot. They quickly mobbed me, but due to some extremem patience i managed to either block or shrug off most of their hits and kill them one by one.

Now in any realistic scenario, I would've been rugby-tackled down, and would have sharp things inserted into my armpits.

That's why I think the current mobbing is aesthetically displeasing but functionally realistic.

[GreySaber]

For those who don't know, Half swording is taking the sword with the blade in one hand, and
A. Using it as a wrestling lever
B. Trying to poke the point into the mail which covered the gaps under the armpit, or into any other place not covered with a solde plate.

It didn't work very well, but it worked better then anything else done with a sword to plate armor, which is why i's the best solution to the problem of using a sword on a man in plate.

[Kissaki]

It didn't work very well, but it worked better then anything else done with a sword to plate armor, which is why i's the best solution to the problem of using a sword on a man in plate.

The only solution, because you don't stab accurately enough with both hands on the grip, and you can't hack through plate with a sword. And if you are yourself as armoured as he, then it would word very well. But if you are lightly armoured, then halfswording does not work very well. Simply because it won't take him as long to take you down as the other way around. Sure, other weapons are far more effective at defeating armoured opponents, and compared to those I guess you could say the sword didn't work very well.

[Archonsod]

Is it really realistic?

 Any kind of computer model is an abstraction by necessity. Kissaki pretty much hit the nail on the head - the important thing is to balance whichever group of abstractions you happen to be modelling, not necessarily to make those abstractions more 'realistic'. As long as the game fits to it's own internal logic then it makes no difference.
 For me, the realistic combat mod fails to balance out those abstractions.
 

[Sqeecoo]

 Any kind of computer model is an abstraction by necessity. Kissaki pretty much hit the nail on the head - the important thing is to balance whichever group of abstractions you happen to be modelling, not necessarily to make those abstractions more 'realistic'. As long as the game fits to it's own internal logic then it makes no difference.
 For me, the realistic combat mod fails to balance out those abstractions.
 

But why exactly?
I understand armor shouldn't make you impervious to harm, but Ron's model allows a skilled fighter with high powerstrike to kill a heavily armored enemy in 2-3 strikes with a non-armor-piercing weapon. Also, while you rarely get hurt in armor, enemies will mob you and beat you to death, especially higher-level ones, although it might take them a while. I do think you die *too* slow, but you do die.

So it seems to me you are saying Ron's model is great, but the armor values have to be tweaked a bit. Is this so, or is there something really wrong with his model?

To make things clear, I think Ron is arrogant and condescending, and I hate the way he constantly brings up his personal experience but *never* cites any sources. Thus I am somewhat sceptical about his model, but I can't find any fault with his reasoning, not being at all knowledgeable myself. That's the reason I'm asking you guys.

[Jallon]

I like the fact that if you have great armor, lower-class soldiers can barely kill you. In the 14th century (i think, could be 13th or 15th, not sure) at the time when plate armor was very well-made, they used to say the only way to kill a knight, was to knock him down and beat him 'till he died. If you had that good armor, a wimpy, low-class level soldier with a dagger couldnt hurt you, without using proper techniques, which cant be implemented into M&B.

[Kissaki]

I like the fact that if you have great armor, lower-class soldiers can barely kill you. In the 14th century (i think, could be 13th or 15th, not sure) at the time when plate armor was very well-made, they used to say the only way to kill a knight, was to knock him down and beat him 'till he died. If you had that good armor, a wimpy, low-class level soldier with a dagger couldnt hurt you, without using proper techniques, which cant be implemented into M&B.

But in vanilla M&B, you become functionally immune to solitary river pirates and their ilk, too. The only way they can kill a knight is exactly as you described: "the only way to kill a knight, was to knock him down and beat him 'till he died." Except stun-lock instead of knocking him down, but it's all the same in practical terms.

Also, as you hint to in your last sentence (and as I pointed out previously), because the correct response with a given weapon cannot be implemented in M&B, we must allow the weapon's functions that ARE in the game to fulfill those roles. It should be perfectly possible for a band of angry peasants to mob and kill a solitary knight.

[Merentha]

I like the fact that if you have great armor, lower-class soldiers can barely kill you. In the 14th century (i think, could be 13th or 15th, not sure) at the time when plate armor was very well-made, they used to say the only way to kill a knight, was to knock him down and beat him 'till he died. If you had that good armor, a wimpy, low-class level soldier with a dagger couldnt hurt you, without using proper techniques, which cant be implemented into M&B.

Sure, but since in M&B, you can't knock someone over and shove a rondel in his face, nor can you run away, the "realism" model is anything but.  It takes some things and makes them as close to Losey's vision of realism as possible without updating everything, leaving horrible imbalances.

[Kissaki]

I don't want this to become an anti-Ron thread; even though I tend to disagree with him on a great many things, I have nothing against the man as a person. And if he stumbles across this thread, I don't want him to think his efforts are unappreciated. There definitely is room in M&B for a realism mod, using the same methods as Ron has. But I don't think his system is it. At least, not yet. Some of his ideas were quite inspirational, for example something as simple as changing the damage type of some arrows to cutting instead of piercing. Although, his reason for doing so was, I believe, to reflect the damage actually done by broad arrowpoints. But the reason I find it interesting is that it will effectively reduce its armour penetration in the game, and indeed such arrows were not designed to pierce through metal.

[Sqeecoo]

It takes some things and makes them as close to Losey's vision of realism as possible without updating everything, leaving horrible imbalances.

But what imbalances exactley?
Regarding Ron-bashing: as I said, I personally dislike him, but find his mod fairly interesting, although the armor seems overpowered. I did raise that issue with him, but he dismissed it based on his great personal experience. While his arguments sound reasonable, I would like to hear a second opinion on the issue and on the mod in general, and hopefully use that info to prod the mod in the right direction.

[Jallon]

Well, hes a great expert on weapons, and has helped me learn a lot. I can see why some people dont like his combat model, but i think personally hes a great guy.

[Archonsod]

So it seems to me you are saying Ron's model is great, but the armor values have to be tweaked a bit. Is this so, or is there something really wrong with his model?

It's more of a personal thing. One of my pet peeves of RPG's (met unfortunately frequently in their earlier days) is when your character/party reaches the point where lower level enemies can't hurt you. In that situation, fighting them is no longer fun but a chore. The realistic combat mod causes this situation far too often. You get swarmed by a few hundred river pirates and rather than being a life or death struggle it turns into a clickfest for the player.

To make things clear, I think Ron is arrogant and condescending, and I hate the way he constantly brings up his personal experience but *never* cites any sources. Thus I am somewhat sceptical about his model, but I can't find any fault with his reasoning, not being at all knowledgeable myself. That's the reason I'm asking you guys.

Can't really say one thing or the other about the guy personally. Like I said though there's no such thing as a 'realistic' combat model. You have to abstract at some point (for instance, there's no model for freak meteorite strikes killing your opponent, which could happen in the real world although unlikely...). Which is where realism goes wrong. When I kill a guy in plate with my sword, are we assuming the action on screen is literal, or an abstraction. If literal then yes, it shouldn't have killed a guy in plate simply by swinging. Abstraction - perhaps I hit him in a joint, found a weakness in his armour or similar. There's no right or realistic answer.

There definitely is room in M&B for a realism mod, using the same methods as Ron has. But I don't think his system is it. At least, not yet.

That's the thing though, it's not a realism mod, rather it's an alteration of the types/levels of abstraction used. To some it would be more realistic, to others less so. My problem with the mod is as I said, it fails on a game level rather than on a goal level (obviously the qualifier being what Ron's opinion of a more realistic set of abstraction is). It's generally a standard problem with mods (and games for that matter) which take a singular goal.  For me, I feel Ron has made several alterations to certain things without looking at the indirect changes it will trigger. Given that there's some quite subtle background mechanics within the game as a whole (let alone the combat model), many of which are counter-intuitive and non-obvious, it's not really that surprising.