no, morrowind lack feedback and attacks felt weight-less; however, it would be nice to see the integration of dice roll type calc into combat. Not so much on hit or miss, but on effective and uneffective hits that effect staggers and health loss. I also wish reach was calc. As in point-blank daggers would score more effectively than 2handed (no room to build momentum) opposed to 2 meters out were 2handed would be at its apex... Any ideas

I've had enemies that were not aware of my presence do it. That's how.

The worst was not only a sneak shot but a sneak shot at a bandit with their back to me at night (although time of day doesn't matter) inside some place (which is why time of day doesn't matter) and the shot itself didn't alert anyone (by shot I mean the sound of the bow firing which can alert enemies if they are close enough). The shot was from one room, down the hall to an enemy in another room. They magically slid across the room (out of view) but when the arrow hit the wall, they went to investigate. The next arrow hit just fine with no attempt to dodge. In fact, other than that first arrow getting dodged in an extremely exaggerated fashion, I've never had an enemy repeat it in the same fight.

I did have enemies change direction on me after leading a shot on them. Now that I would say is AI dodging. I fire and they move at a normal speed. Which is the other reason I think it's a glitch. The sheer speed at which they move and the lack of proper animation.

I've heard of some animals doing this too.

yes, it was undeniably more realistic. probability rolls, chance-to-hit and the like substitute the myriad of factors that go into a real combat situation that more hands-on combat systems cannot account for. it was also undeniably more svck.

realism is but one of many tools to immerse the player. annoying fatalities and lack of skill involvement aside, skyrim does have better melee and ranged combat. i love classic RPG combat mechanics, but in regards to TES they should have a limited role. TES could very well be tailored to a more stat-based combat system, but given their track record i seriously question bethesda's ability to do that even if they wanted to, which they clearly dont.

No, not really.

If you hit someone just once with a sword in real life, they either die or need to go to the hospital. They don't pull out a healing potion and keep on fighting. They don't even keep on fighting unless they're the Black Knight from Monty Python.

Realistically, even if you are the dragonborn, getting hit by a bandit with a greatsword in the face should have you down for the count, not deal you 10 damage put of your 800 health pool.

So how exactly do you explain it? The explanation is simple, your armor blocks it. When you have been hit, your armor has 100% chance to block 80% damage, no dice rolls needed.

What of Morrowind? It is basically 80% chance to block 100% damage. See, they are actually the same mathematically and strategy wise. The only difference is presentation, of which Skyrim's is more intuitive. The underlying concept of having better armor take less damage remains the same.

So if you think Morrowind combat is more about character skill (ie RPG) and skyrim is more player skill (ie action game). Think twice. The difference is just dice rolls and presentation. Now if Skyrim had dodge, parry, rolls and combos, things will be different. Those are really player skill dependent with timing and all.

When you explain it that way both systems are equally bad. How does that line go? "It's just a scratch! But I cut your arm off! No you didn't!" Oh well something like that anyways.

http://youtu.be/zKhEw7nD9C4

melee combat in morrowind is absolutely horrific. the only thing good is using a warhammer with your skill set at 100.

Morrowind's combat was *not* more realistic rofl..

Ok, I am not gifted or skilled in the use of swords in real life. Put a dummy in front of me, and give me a sword, guess what? I am going to hit that thing EVERY single time I hit it, because I'm not an idiot and simply swinging a sword at a immobile target is not going to be hard.

So if ANYTHING, Morrowind's combat is extremely UNrealistic. Because there's a dark elf right in front of me and I'm swing my axe right at his face and I'm not hitting him LOL? The Dark elf is not moving, I'm swinging, and I just..miss? How stupid do I have to be to simply miss? No one does that, that's unrealistic. My axe just disappears right through his body? Okay?

Now, take Skyrim for example. That doesn't happen. If I swing my axe at a dark elf, and I swing AT The dark elf, I will hit it. Just like real life. If the dark elf moves, I won't. Voila. There you go. Skyrims combat is more realistic.

The fact that this thread even got past 10 responses makes me sad.

i advocate modern graphical tech to be able to swap the miss when it clearly shows you made contact with one showing you actually not making contact.

i don't know much about pen and paper and that's why i didn't talk about it or refer to it.

It's hardly player skill based. All you as the player have to do is point and click. You have two buttons, one to whack and one to block/stun. It requires about as much skill as taking a pee to master that do that.

The damage you do in Skyrim is based in your character's skills and perks, the effectiveness of your whacks, blocks and stuns. Same as is your opponents ability to negate those. And above those, Skyrim still has dice roll mechanics, for critical hits and death blows.

I agree there should be more factors like parrying, blocking, dodging, by the character and the enemy. But they should be character skill based. And not dice roll based like in Morrowind, where melee effectively was nothing more then a game of chance per click, with a progressive increase to succeed the higher the skill and no feedback whats however.

Refer to my post Houseparty, it is indeed player based.

zyghart-

i completely agree that in this day and age of video games there should be a way to have some kind of system that allows both methods to work together in a great way.

because, ya, i want to drive but there better be some rules/limits or else it's a racing sim and that isn't fun for me. real life, sure!

I'm not sure what these two statements mean along side each other. Dice rolls are based on character skill. Is your position that success should be determined by character skill, but they should remove any random chance? As in, static results based on character skill? An example might be, if you're swordplay skill is at level 50 you will always perform 50 points of damage (plus whatever weapon/equipment modifiers might be in effect). Why is that superior to a system that can result in a range of successes or failures of varying degrees?

Or you can refer to my post above where I attempted to prove Morrowind and Skyrim actually did the same thing.

Skyrim: Armour protects you from 80% of the damage 100% of the time.

Morrowind: Armor protects you from 100% of the damage 80% of the time.

Difference: Presentation and dice rolls. This is the exact same difference between how Magic Resist and Magic Absorption worked in Skyrim.

missing straight up. go watch some pro fencers on youtube see if they land all there blows.

Wasn't aware that Skyrim or Morrowind had fencing. Although moving that aside, how it's visually represented in Morrowind, you'd have to have severe brain damage and neurological damage to miss a target in melee combat.

In any case, moving away from such a dreadful system resulted in a much more enjoyable combat experience for the MAJORITY of players. You'd be hard pressed to find many people who enjoy Morrowind's combat more than Skyrim's combat.

The dice roll itself is random. Your chance at success increases as you increase in level, but it's basically just a game of chance. So it is partly character skill based, but only in your chance at succes, above that it is random.

In Morrowind the dice roll governed hit or miss. Not variations in damage dealt. Each hit was a full hit, minus the enemy's ability to negate damage, which was also governed by a dice roll in it's succes rate.

Off course there should be some variation in your ability to deal damage per swing, as if it were a dice roll, sure. Same as that in Skyrim death blows and critical hits are in general governed by a dice roll and your succes rate at that is governed by skill and perks. But there should always be a base damage rate dependent purely on skill, not chance.

Well, it was a throwback to ye olden days, of dice rolling, where you couldn't see your opponent, because it was all in your mind. It should have been a damage reduction.

But you're absolutely right, if you put something long and heavy in my hands and tell me to try and hit you, I'm going to be pretty successful.

Yes. And that is Morrowind's flaw. Everything else is very much 'active'. It sold itself on being a free-roaming world, where you had direct control over everything.

Apart from the Combat. The combat was an illusion of fihting. Your own personal ability to time and perform attacks had no bearing on what actually happened in combat. Targetting was irrelevent, timing was pointless. You basically just spammed the mouse button and hoped that the game let you win.

It was the one design element that was really at odds with everything else the game was trying to do.

Passive combat is a total mismatch for a game of this type.




For spells possibly. But for actual fighting it would be just as odd and out of place as it was in Morrowind.

You can of course actually miss in Skyrim and Oblivion. It all comes down to targeting. But if the cursor is lined up and you bizarrely do not connect with your target I can guarantee that the vast majority of Users would see that as a whacking great design flaw that they simply do not want.

By all means have the user only achieve minimum damage with a weapon, until their skill in that area improves, but the idea of targetting correctly but having the game 'make you miss' would be seen as nothing more than 'the game cheating' in modern videogames.




Exactly. In reality you would CONNECT with your target. You might not to the heaviest amount of damage, but you'd at least draw blood.




In theory yes. But they were still largely ineffectual, and were still ultimately passive rather than active combat. It's an example of a game trying to create the illusion of varied active combat, but in reality it's still just an animation covering a far simpler, passive, combat mechanic.




Yeah. I'd have thought that to be pretty obvious. It appears others missed that.

It's quite simple really... In Morrowind when you swing at an opponent, you can only HOPE that you hit. In Skyrim when you swing at an opponent you KNOW you will HIT if your aim is true, and you KNOW you will MISS if your aim was off. You have full control over your combat effectiveness.

I know which way I prefer.

Exactly. I don't think that the former can really be considered viable in the current geheration of videogames.

It could be done, but you would have to give up any view of your character. What kills it is the fact that you can see your weapon/s swinging, and see they're on target. Without this, not much problem.