Hello!
My name's Abek and this is my favorite game. I've been posting a lot and I don't really want to dominate the forum so this thread will combine all the ideas that I've had while playing.
I'll try to be as reasonable as I can with the suggestions. That is to say, anything that doesn't fit in with the theme and nature of Kenshi or anything that would be very difficult for the developers to code/program in I'm not going to ask for.
That being said, here's what I think we could add to make the gameplay more enjoyable! I welcome any feedback or discussion with any of my suggestions.
Abek's Proposals
Faction Armor and Personal Responsibility
Here's a suggestion that I think would be cool. Currently, each faction's soldiers and many of their workers wear a uniform. I think that any armor crafted by your faction should be branded as your faction armor (besides assassin, ninja rags, and the like).
It's annoying that if any of your faction members get in fights with another faction it ruins that relationship for all your faction members. What I'm proposing changes that. Only when you're in your faction uniform will your actions affect your faction's relationship with other factions (good or bad).
I noticed that when in disguise, one of the factors greatly influencing whether your disguise was successful was the presence of an enemy that knew you personally, one you engaged in combat with. It could be implemented that any enemy attacked by your character remains hostile and remembers your character. If you attack a city (Clownsteady), the guards gang beat you up and throw you in prison. These guards will remember that specific character and are immediately hostile to your character if they encounter him again.
I'm also considering how you would combine the faction uniform with each character's personal standing with enemies. Suppose that character who was jailed in Clownsteady puts on your faction's uniform. Here we could implement the Disguise feature already in the game. There would be a discovery chance for the guard to go, "Hey! I know you! You're that dork who attacked us!" this would initiate a faction vs. faction conflict as opposed to a lone man vs. faction conflict.
I love a scenario that would play like this. A bandit joins the army. His previous victims recognize him. They attack! His new teammates are like, "He's with us now!" And that's the catalyst for the faction war.
Here's a suggestion that I think would be cool. Currently, each faction's soldiers and many of their workers wear a uniform. I think that any armor crafted by your faction should be branded as your faction armor (besides assassin, ninja rags, and the like).
It's annoying that if any of your faction members get in fights with another faction it ruins that relationship for all your faction members. What I'm proposing changes that. Only when you're in your faction uniform will your actions affect your faction's relationship with other factions (good or bad).
I noticed that when in disguise, one of the factors greatly influencing whether your disguise was successful was the presence of an enemy that knew you personally, one you engaged in combat with. It could be implemented that any enemy attacked by your character remains hostile and remembers your character. If you attack a city (Clownsteady), the guards gang beat you up and throw you in prison. These guards will remember that specific character and are immediately hostile to your character if they encounter him again.
I'm also considering how you would combine the faction uniform with each character's personal standing with enemies. Suppose that character who was jailed in Clownsteady puts on your faction's uniform. Here we could implement the Disguise feature already in the game. There would be a discovery chance for the guard to go, "Hey! I know you! You're that dork who attacked us!" this would initiate a faction vs. faction conflict as opposed to a lone man vs. faction conflict.
I love a scenario that would play like this. A bandit joins the army. His previous victims recognize him. They attack! His new teammates are like, "He's with us now!" And that's the catalyst for the faction war.
Leviathan Hunters (More high level opponents)
So the range of statistics (attack, defence, strength, dexterity, etc.,) go from 0-100 yet the majority of npcs only have skills between 8-35 depending on the faction. After you pass 45 the number of enemies that pose a threat are drastically reduced. You can attack factions on your own with impunity. The only enemies that can still beat you up with ease are leviathans. They are amazing and my favorite.
Since the world itself doesn't scale with your character, I think we should have a greater range of NPCs. I love the Adventurer's Guild wanderers who have relatively high stats and beat up bandits with ease. I want a ton of new groups, for example Leviathan Hunters. This faction would travel in pairs, have stats in the 70-85 range and be hostile to wildlife. We could have some other enemies. I'd like to fill in the gaps between 50-100. Let's raise the stats of the samurai lords to 80-95. More enemies go slay! More variety and enemies to work against!
So the range of statistics (attack, defence, strength, dexterity, etc.,) go from 0-100 yet the majority of npcs only have skills between 8-35 depending on the faction. After you pass 45 the number of enemies that pose a threat are drastically reduced. You can attack factions on your own with impunity. The only enemies that can still beat you up with ease are leviathans. They are amazing and my favorite.
Since the world itself doesn't scale with your character, I think we should have a greater range of NPCs. I love the Adventurer's Guild wanderers who have relatively high stats and beat up bandits with ease. I want a ton of new groups, for example Leviathan Hunters. This faction would travel in pairs, have stats in the 70-85 range and be hostile to wildlife. We could have some other enemies. I'd like to fill in the gaps between 50-100. Let's raise the stats of the samurai lords to 80-95. More enemies go slay! More variety and enemies to work against!
Pacification
There's currently a bluffing skill that hasn't been implemented. It's goal is to work with the ability to take the disguises of other factions and modify how effective your disguise is. It should have another function. When a hostile mob is attacking you, your only options are, "Attack target" and "Attack all". You should have a third and fourth option, "Pacify target" and "Pacify all". Based on your combat skill and your bluffing skill it would either "Success!' and your target goes passive or "Failed!" and your target continues to attack you.
The calculation for pacification would go
Σ ((player combat attack+player combat defence) * (bluffing skill modifier))-25 ≥ Σ (enemy combat attack +enemy combat defence).
Just as with any skill, bluffing at zero would result in a 0.25 efficiency. Therefore, even if your character had a combat skill total of 200, with 0 bluffing, his pacification value would be 50. Therefore he could only pacify an enemy with a total combat skill of 25, even though he outguns him by 175 points. Since enemy combat skill is additive, you couldn't pacify groups of enemies under most circumstances and lone enemies would continue to attack you even if you outgun them.
The math would have to be tweaked for balancing. I absolutely don't want any kind of, "Please don't kill me!" to work. But I want a, "BACK OFF, do you want to die?" which would generally fail if you were outnumbered or unskilled.
There's currently a bluffing skill that hasn't been implemented. It's goal is to work with the ability to take the disguises of other factions and modify how effective your disguise is. It should have another function. When a hostile mob is attacking you, your only options are, "Attack target" and "Attack all". You should have a third and fourth option, "Pacify target" and "Pacify all". Based on your combat skill and your bluffing skill it would either "Success!' and your target goes passive or "Failed!" and your target continues to attack you.
The calculation for pacification would go
Σ ((player combat attack+player combat defence) * (bluffing skill modifier))-25 ≥ Σ (enemy combat attack +enemy combat defence).
Just as with any skill, bluffing at zero would result in a 0.25 efficiency. Therefore, even if your character had a combat skill total of 200, with 0 bluffing, his pacification value would be 50. Therefore he could only pacify an enemy with a total combat skill of 25, even though he outguns him by 175 points. Since enemy combat skill is additive, you couldn't pacify groups of enemies under most circumstances and lone enemies would continue to attack you even if you outgun them.
The math would have to be tweaked for balancing. I absolutely don't want any kind of, "Please don't kill me!" to work. But I want a, "BACK OFF, do you want to die?" which would generally fail if you were outnumbered or unskilled.
Last edited by Abek on Thu Aug 20, 2015 8:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Updated Weapon Crafting
I think it would be awesome if we were allowed to change the statistics of a weapon. We would have slider bars that we could adjust in order to change the weight, cut damage, blunt damage and bleeding modifiers. Changing this would also change the price, quality, and grade of the weapon. Researching weapon technologies would increase the caps on the slider bars. The quality would also modify the amount of time it would take to craft the weapon. This time would increase exponentially. The greatest of blades (maxed out slider bars) would take many months to craft so you would settle for a more reasonable weapon until you had a smith who would dedicate his life to forging your master blade.
I also want to be able to name my weapons. Headcrusher. Facemasher. Overcompensation. And so on.
I think it would be awesome if we were allowed to change the statistics of a weapon. We would have slider bars that we could adjust in order to change the weight, cut damage, blunt damage and bleeding modifiers. Changing this would also change the price, quality, and grade of the weapon. Researching weapon technologies would increase the caps on the slider bars. The quality would also modify the amount of time it would take to craft the weapon. This time would increase exponentially. The greatest of blades (maxed out slider bars) would take many months to craft so you would settle for a more reasonable weapon until you had a smith who would dedicate his life to forging your master blade.
I also want to be able to name my weapons. Headcrusher. Facemasher. Overcompensation. And so on.
Tools and Contextually Different Animations
I know it's cute that we bang on the lab desk to do research and we bang on plants to make them grow. However, i think it would be nice if we have different animations for each task? Even better, perhaps we need to equip a hoe in the primary item slot in order to farm? A pickaxe in order to mine?
In fact, if we do that we don't even need to have different animations for the task, just have the tool visually in our hands to be able to do the work (Though it would make me happy if each action was distinct).
Plus, it would be cool to kill a man with a hoe.
I know it's cute that we bang on the lab desk to do research and we bang on plants to make them grow. However, i think it would be nice if we have different animations for each task? Even better, perhaps we need to equip a hoe in the primary item slot in order to farm? A pickaxe in order to mine?
In fact, if we do that we don't even need to have different animations for the task, just have the tool visually in our hands to be able to do the work (Though it would make me happy if each action was distinct).
Plus, it would be cool to kill a man with a hoe.
Abek wrote:Pacification
There's currently a bluffing skill that hasn't been implemented. It's goal is to work with the ability to take the disguises of other factions and modify how effective your disguise is. It should have another function. When a hostile mob is attacking you, your only options are, "Attack target" and "Attack all". You should have a third and fourth option, "Pacify target" and "Pacify all". Based on your combat skill and your bluffing skill it would either "Success!' and your target goes passive or "Failed!" and your target continues to attack you.
No magic please.
generally if someones going to kill you. no amount of speaking is going to save you. Bandits want what you have , factions have orders. Now you could potentially dissuade attackers.
but the vast majority of individuals are going to attack you no matter what you say. they might change their minds during the fight when they realize they're out classed. but in the real world people who 'want' to kill someone, and especially those who have done so in the past, aren't likely to stop simply because you say "Please don't kill me".
Now you could try pretending ot be 'tough' and convincing them not to , but again most experiences fighters. are more then likely going to fight anyway.
those who aren't experienced but out number you will more then likely still attack you.
if Pacification worked all that well in reality. we wouldnt have weapons or wars.
A lot of this is true. What I was thinking was this. In reality, pacification works when an enemy is outnumbered and outgunned. For example, if multiple soldiers, police, etc., point their weapons at a hostile target and order him to drop his weapon and get on the ground. Now, this doesn't always work, some people are scared/angry, don't speak the language, whathaveyou, and people die. But quite often, they choose life when given the option. A skilled, experienced fighter is more likely to know when NOT to fight because he knows what he can win and what he can't. Hahaha, of course if he's confident he can win, no amount of talk will win him over.Chinsei wrote: No magic please.
generally if someones going to kill you. no amount of speaking is going to save you. Bandits want what you have , factions have orders. Now you could potentially dissuade attackers.
but the vast majority of individuals are going to attack you no matter what you say. they might change their minds during the fight when they realize they're out classed. but in the real world people who 'want' to kill someone, and especially those who have done so in the past, aren't likely to stop simply because you say "Please don't kill me".
Now you could try pretending ot be 'tough' and convincing them not to , but again most experiences fighters. are more then likely going to fight anyway.
those who aren't experienced but out number you will more then likely still attack you.
if Pacification worked all that well in reality. we wouldnt have weapons or wars.
Now, reconsidering your suggestion, I don't think it makes sense for a lone soldier to be able to pacify multiple enemies. That's not realistic under almost any circumstance. Numbers breed confidence, even if that soldier was armed to the teeth.
So here's my updated suggestion: The calculation for pacification would go
Σ ((player combat attack+player combat defence) * (bluffing skill modifier))-25 ≥ Σ (enemy combat attack +enemy combat defence).
Just as with any skill, bluffing at zero would result in a 0.25 efficiency. Therefore, even if your character had a combat skill total of 200, with 0 bluffing, his pacification value would be 50. Therefore he could only pacify an enemy with a total combat skill of 25, even though he outguns him by 175 points. Since enemy combat skill is additive, you couldn't pacify groups of enemies under most circumstances and lone enemies would continue to attack you even if you outgun them.
The math would have to be tweaked for balancing, but how does that sound to you? I absolutely don't want any kind of, "Please don't kill me!" to work. But I want a, "BACK OFF, do you want to die?" which would generally fail if you were outnumbered or unskilled.
Stamina and Hunger
This is the only one of my suggestions that would radically change the gameplay in Kenshi. If they do implement this, it should be done with as few status bars as possible. At a minimum we should have hunger, thirst, and fatigue.
With such an amazing health system, it doesn't make a lot of sense to be able to run for years without any breaks. However, the last thing you want is a The Sims style green bar management game so we'd have to scale it right.
Right now, 10 lbs of water, 1 unit in the game, is about 1.2 gallons. The real problem is that it takes up 5x5 inventory space. That's way too much space for too little water unless you're gonna wear a backpack and I don't want to implement a system that requires everyone to wear a backpack. I'm thinking have water and food come in the same sizes as first aid and splint kits. They'd maybe have 2, 5, and 15 charges. You'd have thirst and hunger bars that would steadily decrease just as the Blood bar does when you're cut. Maybe they'd increase faster while in combat or with a higher encumbrance. You'd right click on your character and select eat/drink and they'd take a knee like when they loot or do first aid and their bars would fill up!
Fatigue would work the same way, but they shouldn't have to rest at towns. That's too annoying. Maybe every other day they would need at least 8 hours? Or maybe they ought to have sleeping bags. I'm not sure. What do you guys think? I want to remove the traits that make our characters like robots wrapped in flesh.
This is the only one of my suggestions that would radically change the gameplay in Kenshi. If they do implement this, it should be done with as few status bars as possible. At a minimum we should have hunger, thirst, and fatigue.
With such an amazing health system, it doesn't make a lot of sense to be able to run for years without any breaks. However, the last thing you want is a The Sims style green bar management game so we'd have to scale it right.
Right now, 10 lbs of water, 1 unit in the game, is about 1.2 gallons. The real problem is that it takes up 5x5 inventory space. That's way too much space for too little water unless you're gonna wear a backpack and I don't want to implement a system that requires everyone to wear a backpack. I'm thinking have water and food come in the same sizes as first aid and splint kits. They'd maybe have 2, 5, and 15 charges. You'd have thirst and hunger bars that would steadily decrease just as the Blood bar does when you're cut. Maybe they'd increase faster while in combat or with a higher encumbrance. You'd right click on your character and select eat/drink and they'd take a knee like when they loot or do first aid and their bars would fill up!
Fatigue would work the same way, but they shouldn't have to rest at towns. That's too annoying. Maybe every other day they would need at least 8 hours? Or maybe they ought to have sleeping bags. I'm not sure. What do you guys think? I want to remove the traits that make our characters like robots wrapped in flesh.
"Now, reconsidering your suggestion, I don't think it makes sense for a lone soldier to be able to pacify multiple enemies. That's not realistic under almost any circumstance. Numbers breed confidence, even if that soldier was armed to the teeth. "
actually if a group of people attack someone an they find that the someone is far more skilled, and is obviously having an easy time beating one or more of them. then the more the individual beats the less likely the others might have to continue fighting.
this is being applied mostly to bandits since most bandits aren't usually loyal . and would more then likely run away rather then attempt to fight someone who is obviously more then capable of killing them.
Groups only inspire confidence so long as they believe they're strong.
but time an time again history has shown if you eliminate the alpha of any group , that group will gradually back down.
Now some people are of course the types who love pushing their limits so them seeing someone who out classes the others might try to fight and win with everything they have an be more encouraged as the fight goes on an is harder. course as far as human nature goes this type of individual is quite rare.
groups are highly dependant on their leaders for their 'confidence' since most people who follow someone assume that the individual they follow is 'strong' and believe that person might not be beatable. or they might owe the individual for saving them.
the groups loyalty and cohesion depend highly on 'why' they banded together.
but breaking the morale of groups isn't that hard. however it often requires you to 'prove' you're more skilled then any of them. which usually means multiple opponents in quick succession , or beating those the group percieves as its 'strongest' fighters.
actually if a group of people attack someone an they find that the someone is far more skilled, and is obviously having an easy time beating one or more of them. then the more the individual beats the less likely the others might have to continue fighting.
this is being applied mostly to bandits since most bandits aren't usually loyal . and would more then likely run away rather then attempt to fight someone who is obviously more then capable of killing them.
Groups only inspire confidence so long as they believe they're strong.
but time an time again history has shown if you eliminate the alpha of any group , that group will gradually back down.
Now some people are of course the types who love pushing their limits so them seeing someone who out classes the others might try to fight and win with everything they have an be more encouraged as the fight goes on an is harder. course as far as human nature goes this type of individual is quite rare.
groups are highly dependant on their leaders for their 'confidence' since most people who follow someone assume that the individual they follow is 'strong' and believe that person might not be beatable. or they might owe the individual for saving them.
the groups loyalty and cohesion depend highly on 'why' they banded together.
but breaking the morale of groups isn't that hard. however it often requires you to 'prove' you're more skilled then any of them. which usually means multiple opponents in quick succession , or beating those the group percieves as its 'strongest' fighters.
A few of the suggestions you posted here are already planned.
Faction uniforms is planned.
Hunger and stamina are both planned as well.
Diplomacy can go a long way though. Generally people have a reason why they want to attack you, so if you work out what that is, and find a 3 second speech that could make them feel it beneficial to not attack you, it could work. But that's not easy, and not everyone is willing to listen or cares.
I'm having a hard time recalling, but I think chris was actually planning on making methods to get people to stand down... don't quote me on that though, it's been a long time since i've delved into those details, and my memory on that is hazy.
Diplomacy, Intimidate, and bluff would be difficult skills to implement into the Kenshi world regarding social functions, but you'd need all three, or go with diplomacy only, since the latter two are types of "diplomacy". It/they would certainly be an interesting skill to raise though..
Faction uniforms is planned.
Hunger and stamina are both planned as well.
Sounds like diplomacy/intimidate more so than a bluff. I mean.. You could bluff your way through it, making them think you're more dangerous than you actually are, but that might only really work against civillians or hungry bandits. Dust bandits have probably had a fair share of fighting experience, and can generally tell that if you're running around in rags, an iron club, and a backpack, no amount of bluffing is going to dissuade them.Abek wrote: A lot of this is true. What I was thinking was this. In reality, pacification works when an enemy is outnumbered and outgunned. For example, if multiple soldiers, police, etc., point their weapons at a hostile target and order him to drop his weapon and get on the ground. Now, this doesn't always work, some people are scared/angry, don't speak the language, whathaveyou, and people die. But quite often, they choose life when given the option. A skilled, experienced fighter is more likely to know when NOT to fight because he knows what he can win and what he can't. Hahaha, of course if he's confident he can win, no amount of talk will win him over.
Now, reconsidering your suggestion, I don't think it makes sense for a lone soldier to be able to pacify multiple enemies. That's not realistic under almost any circumstance. Numbers breed confidence, even if that soldier was armed to the teeth.
So here's my updated suggestion: The calculation for pacification would go
Σ ((player combat attack+player combat defence) * (bluffing skill modifier))-25 ≥ Σ (enemy combat attack +enemy combat defence).
Just as with any skill, bluffing at zero would result in a 0.25 efficiency. Therefore, even if your character had a combat skill total of 200, with 0 bluffing, his pacification value would be 50. Therefore he could only pacify an enemy with a total combat skill of 25, even though he outguns him by 175 points. Since enemy combat skill is additive, you couldn't pacify groups of enemies under most circumstances and lone enemies would continue to attack you even if you outgun them.
The math would have to be tweaked for balancing, but how does that sound to you? I absolutely don't want any kind of, "Please don't kill me!" to work. But I want a, "BACK OFF, do you want to die?" which would generally fail if you were outnumbered or unskilled.
Diplomacy can go a long way though. Generally people have a reason why they want to attack you, so if you work out what that is, and find a 3 second speech that could make them feel it beneficial to not attack you, it could work. But that's not easy, and not everyone is willing to listen or cares.
I'm having a hard time recalling, but I think chris was actually planning on making methods to get people to stand down... don't quote me on that though, it's been a long time since i've delved into those details, and my memory on that is hazy.
Diplomacy, Intimidate, and bluff would be difficult skills to implement into the Kenshi world regarding social functions, but you'd need all three, or go with diplomacy only, since the latter two are types of "diplomacy". It/they would certainly be an interesting skill to raise though..
OS: Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3570K CPU @ 3.40GHz (4 CPUs), ~3.4GHz
Memory: 16Gb
AMD Radeon R9 390 Series
Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3570K CPU @ 3.40GHz (4 CPUs), ~3.4GHz
Memory: 16Gb
AMD Radeon R9 390 Series
I'm sorry, behaviorally I keep thinking that all the soldiers in Kenshi have guns. You're right. I've often been attacked by a swarm of bandits and WHAM, I swing a cleaver and instantly kill 4 bandits. Then I think, "Wow, these are some dedicated enemies. I would run as soon as I saw someone do that."Chinsei wrote: actually if a group of people attack someone an they find that the someone is far more skilled, and is obviously having an easy time beating one or more of them. then the more the individual beats the less likely the others might have to continue fighting.
this is being applied mostly to bandits since most bandits aren't usually loyal . and would more then likely run away rather then attempt to fight someone who is obviously more then capable of killing them.
Groups only inspire confidence so long as they believe they're strong.
but time an time again history has shown if you eliminate the alpha of any group , that group will gradually back down.
Now some people are of course the types who love pushing their limits so them seeing someone who out classes the others might try to fight and win with everything they have an be more encouraged as the fight goes on an is harder. course as far as human nature goes this type of individual is quite rare.
groups are highly dependant on their leaders for their 'confidence' since most people who follow someone assume that the individual they follow is 'strong' and believe that person might not be beatable. or they might owe the individual for saving them.
the groups loyalty and cohesion depend highly on 'why' they banded together.
but breaking the morale of groups isn't that hard. however it often requires you to 'prove' you're more skilled then any of them. which usually means multiple opponents in quick succession , or beating those the group percieves as its 'strongest' fighters.
We'll see how they choose to implement leader mechanics.
I'm just wondering how we can better implement this into gameplay. Maybe have enemies do, "advantage checks" to determine whether they still have superiority and if they don't, fall into "retreat"? This would make sense. These are theives, not soldiers.
Oh, for sure. I want some deeper options with my interactions with NPCs. And yup, I agree. Until your combat skill and bluffing get higher, it shouldn't work on anybody at all. Do you think we should try to incorporate gear into the equation? It makes more sense. How on earth would an opponent know what your skill level is based on appearance? They couldn't possibly. But they would know what a Fragment Axe is, and they'd know if you were armored head to toe in chain-mail. I just chose combat skill level because it would be easier to put into the game.Zeal wrote:
Sounds like diplomacy/intimidate more so than a bluff. I mean.. You could bluff your way through it, making them think you're more dangerous than you actually are, but that might only really work against civillians or hungry bandits. Dust bandits have probably had a fair share of fighting experience, and can generally tell that if you're running around in rags, an iron club, and a backpack, no amount of bluffing is going to dissuade them.
Diplomacy can go a long way though. Generally people have a reason why they want to attack you, so if you work out what that is, and find a 3 second speech that could make them feel it beneficial to not attack you, it could work. But that's not easy, and not everyone is willing to listen or cares.
I'm having a hard time recalling, but I think chris was actually planning on making methods to get people to stand down... don't quote me on that though, it's been a long time since i've delved into those details, and my memory on that is hazy.
Diplomacy, Intimidate, and bluff would be difficult skills to implement into the Kenshi world regarding social functions, but you'd need all three, or go with diplomacy only, since the latter two are types of "diplomacy". It/they would certainly be an interesting skill to raise though..
I'd honestly like to see this aswell.. Seeing someone cleave 3 people essentially in half in a single swing of a 56kg fragment axe would be enough to make me get the hell out of there unless I knew I myself possessed the skill or whatnot to combat something like that... Not something that most dust bandits have... At some point you just simply know that engaging is eminent death.Abek wrote:
I'm just wondering how we can better implement this into gameplay. Maybe have enemies do, "advantage checks" to determine whether they still have superiority and if they don't, fall into "retreat"? This would make sense. These are theives, not soldiers.
You're right that simply looking at someone can't really tell you exactly how skilled they are with a weapon. Strength could be incorporated into the equation though, as looking at someone who looks like they've been starved half their life verses some body builder often gives a hint that someone has -something- of an advantage over you. Equipment aswell. If you're equipped with a rusty little saber and rags, you're going to need another motivator to convince you that you can take out someone in samurai armor or other platemail. Often times that motivator is ignorance, or just extreme bravery.. Bandits are brave, I'll give them that, so that's not to be discounted. Sometimes seeing that shiny new platemail will only encourage those bandits, as the only thing on their mind is either "That will bring in a lot of money when i take it", or the thought of dawning it themselves.Abek wrote:Oh, for sure. I want some deeper options with my interactions with NPCs. And yup, I agree. Until your combat skill and bluffing get higher, it shouldn't work on anybody at all. Do you think we should try to incorporate gear into the equation? It makes more sense. How on earth would an opponent know what your skill level is based on appearance? They couldn't possibly. But they would know what a Fragment Axe is, and they'd know if you were armored head to toe in chain-mail. I just chose combat skill level because it would be easier to put into the game.Zeal wrote:
Sounds like diplomacy/intimidate more so than a bluff. I mean.. You could bluff your way through it, making them think you're more dangerous than you actually are, but that might only really work against civillians or hungry bandits. Dust bandits have probably had a fair share of fighting experience, and can generally tell that if you're running around in rags, an iron club, and a backpack, no amount of bluffing is going to dissuade them.
Diplomacy can go a long way though. Generally people have a reason why they want to attack you, so if you work out what that is, and find a 3 second speech that could make them feel it beneficial to not attack you, it could work. But that's not easy, and not everyone is willing to listen or cares.
I'm having a hard time recalling, but I think chris was actually planning on making methods to get people to stand down... don't quote me on that though, it's been a long time since i've delved into those details, and my memory on that is hazy.
Diplomacy, Intimidate, and bluff would be difficult skills to implement into the Kenshi world regarding social functions, but you'd need all three, or go with diplomacy only, since the latter two are types of "diplomacy". It/they would certainly be an interesting skill to raise though..
Equipment.. Strength.. And if you're skilled yourself, composure. There are actually a lot of ways of determining a skilled individual from another, but those methods are not really a given. It's things you'd have be able to pick up on and recognize yourself through your own exposure/experience. I suppose you could incorporate an overall skill points level in combat skills to emulate something like that, but at the same time, someone with less exposure/experience, it would mean nothing to, as they wouldn't recognize those signs. A group of dust bandits could surround, poke, and laugh at the most skilled swordsman dressed in rags in the world, and then attack, not getting it. But another highly skilled individual could pick up on the confidence eminating from their composure, and weigh "Yeah. I probably shouldn't pick on that guy." disregarding strength or equipment. In essence, the skilled person would be much more likely to be intimidated/talked down from combat than the less skilled people.
OS: Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3570K CPU @ 3.40GHz (4 CPUs), ~3.4GHz
Memory: 16Gb
AMD Radeon R9 390 Series
Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3570K CPU @ 3.40GHz (4 CPUs), ~3.4GHz
Memory: 16Gb
AMD Radeon R9 390 Series
Everything posted makes sense. In the confines of the game, however, the most svelte and waifish female could have a strength of 100. Therefore our omniscience of the enemies battle statistics (str, atk, def) negates any kind of perception the enemy might have. In Kenshi everybody knows everybody else's stats.Zeal wrote:
You're right that simply looking at someone can't really tell you exactly how skilled they are with a weapon. Strength could be incorporated into the equation though, as looking at someone who looks like they've been starved half their life verses some body builder often gives a hint that someone has -something- of an advantage over you. Equipment aswell. If you're equipped with a rusty little saber and rags, you're going to need another motivator to convince you that you can take out someone in samurai armor or other platemail. Often times that motivator is ignorance, or just extreme bravery.. Bandits are brave, I'll give them that, so that's not to be discounted. Sometimes seeing that shiny new platemail will only encourage those bandits, as the only thing on their mind is either "That will bring in a lot of money when i take it", or the thought of dawning it themselves.
Equipment.. Strength.. And if you're skilled yourself, composure. There are actually a lot of ways of determining a skilled individual from another, but those methods are not really a given. It's things you'd have be able to pick up on and recognize yourself through your own exposure/experience. I suppose you could incorporate an overall skill points level in combat skills to emulate something like that, but at the same time, someone with less exposure/experience, it would mean nothing to, as they wouldn't recognize those signs. A group of dust bandits could surround, poke, and laugh at the most skilled swordsman dressed in rags in the world, and then attack, not getting it. But another highly skilled individual could pick up on the confidence eminating from their composure, and weigh "Yeah. I probably shouldn't pick on that guy." disregarding strength or equipment. In essence, the skilled person would be much more likely to be intimidated/talked down from combat than the less skilled people.
Do you think we should change that? It's been suggested by Philthy that we hide the map. That sounds like a great idea. Do you think we should hide enemy stats? I think that would be awesome. We'd be forced to rely on our experience of previous encounters with that enemy and our knowledge of what kinds of weapons and armor the enemy has to judge their strength.
-
philthymcnasty
- Posts: 736
- Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2013 11:57 pm
What about reputation?
Like, if reports are out there, of an 8 foot tall man who runs around without pants and a tricorn hat, but who cuts people in half with a fragment axe, people will start avoiding someone like that.
and we may have impersonators....
Like, if reports are out there, of an 8 foot tall man who runs around without pants and a tricorn hat, but who cuts people in half with a fragment axe, people will start avoiding someone like that.
and we may have impersonators....
Bounty Improvement
What if every slain enemy accrued a bounty? Maybe 350/enemy (Not including bandits). This bounty would be redeemable at the corresponding city. For example, having a bounty from killing United Cities samurai couldn't be redeemable in a Holy Nations city. I'm on the fence on that feature. Maybe you could get turned in anywhere since everybody would like to cash in your bounty? I'm open to suggestions on that. This bounty would also in a sense be your reputation. The higher your bounty the more people would come after you. But after a certain point, the bounty would be more like a deterrant. They'd be scared of a man who has a 700,000 cat bounty on his head. I'll try to think out the math for that behavior.
Money Improvement
I just realized the way money works in this game could use some work. Currently, if you sell an item in Shark, you can immediately buy another item in Heft with that money. I'd like every character as well as every storage chest to have a (Cat$) storage. Just a number when you opened your inventory would do. Money that could be looted, money that would force all your wandering traders to have a base where they could safeguard their money.
What if every slain enemy accrued a bounty? Maybe 350/enemy (Not including bandits). This bounty would be redeemable at the corresponding city. For example, having a bounty from killing United Cities samurai couldn't be redeemable in a Holy Nations city. I'm on the fence on that feature. Maybe you could get turned in anywhere since everybody would like to cash in your bounty? I'm open to suggestions on that. This bounty would also in a sense be your reputation. The higher your bounty the more people would come after you. But after a certain point, the bounty would be more like a deterrant. They'd be scared of a man who has a 700,000 cat bounty on his head. I'll try to think out the math for that behavior.
Money Improvement
I just realized the way money works in this game could use some work. Currently, if you sell an item in Shark, you can immediately buy another item in Heft with that money. I'd like every character as well as every storage chest to have a (Cat$) storage. Just a number when you opened your inventory would do. Money that could be looted, money that would force all your wandering traders to have a base where they could safeguard their money.
-
Hatsune_Neko
- Moderator
- Posts: 4086
- Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2013 9:59 am
- Location: Columbus, OH
looting money has been talked about extensively. and pretty much won't happen last i knew.
Do you believe the sexes should be equal?
Oh heavens no.
Then Men would become unmanageable
Current computer specs.
AMD FX-8150 - Eight Core, 3.60GHz
NVidia GTX 1050TI
24GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600 MHz Ram
WD 1tb HD, 870 EVO 1TB SSD
Oh heavens no.
Then Men would become unmanageable
Current computer specs.
AMD FX-8150 - Eight Core, 3.60GHz
NVidia GTX 1050TI
24GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600 MHz Ram
WD 1tb HD, 870 EVO 1TB SSD
I don't believe an element of the UI should be considered when dealing with gameplay mechanics.. I've too thought it would be interesting to be able to hide that information altogether, and would certainly use a mod to do so, but the stats being shown are a UI element that shouldn't be passed off as a "fourth wall game mechanic"... The AI's shouldn't simply know all your stats based on a number of the UI. It's just representational for you.Abek wrote: Everything posted makes sense. In the confines of the game, however, the most svelte and waifish female could have a strength of 100. Therefore our omniscience of the enemies battle statistics (str, atk, def) negates any kind of perception the enemy might have. In Kenshi everybody knows everybody else's stats.
Do you think we should change that? It's been suggested by Philthy that we hide the map. That sounds like a great idea. Do you think we should hide enemy stats? I think that would be awesome. We'd be forced to rely on our experience of previous encounters with that enemy and our knowledge of what kinds of weapons and armor the enemy has to judge their strength.
--
I was sort of in a hurry when posting this, and didn't address your entire reply.. as for the str thing, there was mention of how a higher str will effect how you physically appear.. someone with 1 str will look like they've been starved for a long time, while someone with a 100 str would be quite muscly. So that "hidden str" won't be so hidden anymore. I wouldn't mind it so much if that str appearence was forced. it would make sense. If you want a slender beutiful looking girl, don't put her to work carrying around stone or swinging a fragment axe for weeks non-stop. It makes sense to me.
OS: Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3570K CPU @ 3.40GHz (4 CPUs), ~3.4GHz
Memory: 16Gb
AMD Radeon R9 390 Series
Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3570K CPU @ 3.40GHz (4 CPUs), ~3.4GHz
Memory: 16Gb
AMD Radeon R9 390 Series
Oh no, I don't care about the AI knowing my stats. AI is AI. By nature, the way they've been coded to behave based on parameters. They already have all the data and should behave accordingly. But I would like to hide those numbers from myself with a mod. Have them be ??? until you engage. Then they'd appear.Zeal wrote:
I don't believe an element of the UI should be considered when dealing with gameplay mechanics.. I've too thought it would be interesting to be able to hide that information altogether, and would certainly use a mod to do so, but the stats being shown are a UI element that shouldn't be passed off as a "fourth wall game mechanic"... The AI's shouldn't simply know all your stats based on a number of the UI. It's just representational for you.
--
I was sort of in a hurry when posting this, and didn't address your entire reply.. as for the str thing, there was mention of how a higher str will effect how you physically appear.. someone with 1 str will look like they've been starved for a long time, while someone with a 100 str would be quite muscly. So that "hidden str" won't be so hidden anymore. I wouldn't mind it so much if that str appearence was forced. it would make sense. If you want a slender beutiful looking girl, don't put her to work carrying around stone or swinging a fragment axe for weeks non-stop. It makes sense to me.
When it come to Str, Str affects muscle tone in this game, not muscle mass. My body fat has been as low as 2% in which case I was toned to perfection. But I've never been as strong as when I was heavier and my body fat was at 14%. It's not how visible the muscles are but how thick they are that counts for strength. I would say in this game it would make sense for Stamina/Endurance in this game to change muscle tone while Strength would change muscle mass. Currently, my girl would look best with that toned 100 str look so off to carry rocks and swing fragaxes she goes!
Gotcha. It was only a minor gripe anyway.Hatsune_Neko wrote:looting money has been talked about extensively. and pretty much won't happen last i knew.
Looks like things have changed in that regard then, since on their Trello page there's a card for making money an inventory item.Hatsune_Neko wrote:looting money has been talked about extensively. and pretty much won't happen last i knew.
https://trello.com/b/tH5cLxBv/final Under 'Unassigned (mostly Mike)' 5th card.
I also highly advise everyone to go through their Trello page, A LOT of really cool things to come in there and a lot of them things people have been suggesting. Maybe even make a sticky thread here and in General Discussion linking to it so people can check it before posting.
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests