Do we really need a combat overhaul? What are your opinions on it?

[Krähenwolf]

On 4/24/2025 at 4:37 PM, Big Bad said:

Maybe there could be weapons dedicated to being used in the off-hand, like a parrying dagger or sickle?

On the wider topic of the off-hand, I'd like to option to hang a lantern on a belt so I can have both light and the ability to hold a shield/tongs/whatever

I am still a bit baffled that there is no way to make a proper miners hat. We have got lanterns, we have got helmets, but no combination of the two. I would take a sizable reduction in head armor (like -15 to -20%) any day if it meant being able to protect myself with a shield when going caving.

Then again, I am also perplexed that there is no miner class in the core game yet, given how often we hear from them in lore books...

[Chuckerton]

43 minutes ago, Krähenwolf said:

Then again, I am also perplexed that there is no miner class in the core game yet, given how often we hear from them in lore books...

You know how in zombie movies theres never any doctors or surgeons? Its always veterinarians. Thats because the doctors and surgeons were in the hospitals when the initial outbreak happens, and the hospitals are where people who get bit go, and then turn. 

I imagine its a similar story with miners in vintage story. The miners were all physically where the bad things started happening. Just from whatever lore books i could find it seems like the caves were getting pretty bad before the lore that ive collected tends to cut off. All the actual miners are probably dead.

Edited April 25, 2025 by Chuckerton

[Arasine]

I'd like to see spears sticking in the mob, slowing them by 10% per spear or similar. Weighted nets, crossbows and early firearms would be great too!   

[Josiah Gibbonson]

3 hours ago, Arasine said:

I'd like to see spears sticking in the mob, slowing them by 10% per spear or similar. Weighted nets, crossbows and early firearms would be great too!   

Ai art is wild

[Arasine]

4 hours ago, Josiah Gibbonson said:

Ai art is wild

It even gives bears six digits :]

[Bumber]

On 4/25/2025 at 1:54 PM, Chuckerton said:

You know how in zombie movies theres never any doctors or surgeons? Its always veterinarians. Thats because the doctors and surgeons were in the hospitals when the initial outbreak happens, and the hospitals are where people who get bit go, and then turn. 

I imagine its a similar story with miners in vintage story. The miners were all physically where the bad things started happening. Just from whatever lore books i could find it seems like the caves were getting pretty bad before the lore that ive collected tends to cut off. All the actual miners are probably dead.

I'm pretty sure seraphs are brought back from the dead, though?

[Chuckerton]

2 hours ago, Bumber said:

I'm pretty sure seraphs are brought back from the dead, though?

I dont know, i dont know the lore for certain. Ive done chapter 1 and almost finished chapter 2. Either way, i just know the mines were getting pretty rough and also you lose temporal stability when youre far underground so whatever calamity has caused things to be as they are, it probably comes from or is strongest, below, where the miners were. And i would imagine being brought back from the dead, not everyone can come back, like if you were alive and then died due to or had some temporal-stability related ailment, you probably cant come back as a seraph. 

I mean theres always the idea that the devs just havent gotten around to adding more backgrounds and might add more like miners or barber surgeons, but were talking about lore reasons right now. 

[Bumber]

15 hours ago, Chuckerton said:

like if you were alive and then died due to or had some temporal-stability related ailment, you probably cant come back as a seraph.

Probably nobody died that way pre-apocalypse. It would've had to be a Jonas experiment, and only his automatons are noted as having killed people as a result.

Miners died from caveins, mostly. I forget if the Rot was a major issue, but that would affect farmers and hunters more.

Edited April 30, 2025 by Bumber

[LoveWyrm]

In my opinion, the combat system, like the temporal storm system, have been mistakes from the get go and were implemented in the worst way possible.

And so far the only patches to them was make enemies more annoying (like animals now fleeing if you ding em in the head instead of dying like a doofus).

I have come to the conclusion that I prefer the doofus behavior, the fleeing behavior adds virtually nothing to the system, other than a mild tactical element if the target runs into a predator infested area, and a mild time penalty.

But seldomly, that matters. It's hard to starve during normal starts, and it's just a silly game of ranged combat ring around the rosie.

Meele ain't that much better. I see no possible overhaul, only a complete renewal for it.

 

Same with the storms, drifters clearly do not need rifts to spawn, they spawn in the dark, too. So that lore bit is gone.

A storm is something that moves through an area, it doesn't manifest itself, and the regular rifts have an annoying repetitive sound, and aren't even a threat. They're ALWAYS a nuisance and if you happen to be in an enclosed space for the night, prepare for the moanfest.

 

People have been cheesing that system from the get go, and I don't see it getting better by just 'polishing' it.

Devs should accept that both aspects were a "griff ins klo" and renew them completely. I have my own ideas for that but I actually think the team behind the game is more competent, they just painted themselves into a corner they don't want to liberate again by copious application of turpentine.

 

Combat overhaul? No.

Combat replacement? Yes. Offhand hunger is dumb, too.

 

Temporal storm overhaul? No.

Temporal storm replacement? Yes. Make it an actual storm. Make enemies less annoying. Make it an event that gives risk vs reward and not

"Ughhhh time to row on the lake for 10 irl minutes", and most certainly, don't ruin cheese while not replacing the system with a more fun one. So no swimming long range stalker enemies that ruin the last bastion of blue lanky alienity...the riverboat tour.

 

And yes, I liking it that little should mean I should turn it off, but it ain't granular enough for that.

 

Personally, I'd like for the 'storms' to actually be really really big rifts you can actually enter, and have the rust world be like the nether, only, on a timer.

Once you go inside the rust world,  you have so or so many ingame hours to leave through the portal, if you fail to do it, you're 'trapped' and need to escape by sacrificing a gear, or dying. Then the game uses your entry point position in the real world for calculating respawn rules (like spawn radius).

 

Something like that.

If you don't choose to enter the rust world, then it simply sets the rift actvity to high, or apocalyptic.and the outside world is shrouded in darkness. That's annoying, but livable enough to not cheese it by going on the boat ride, or sitting in a compression box to game the enemy spawning system...

That said, the rust world should just be the normal world, like it's right now, but with the same warping.

 In fact, I think outside players should see rust world players as faint, warped ghosts. Then add some non voxel goodies in the rust world that are also faintly visible from the outside world. (basically, no need to generate separate worlds, just make the players who are in it, unable to interact with the ones outside it, same with the goodies, but both can interact with the voxels)

What could these goodies do?

Various things. Confer buffs for some time, refill durability of items (even though it's rust world, mechanical items seem to thrive there). Whatever fun stuff you might think of.

 

Turn temporal gears into super special manifested temporal gears (make temporal ones...only be half in the real world) that can be put into machinery (and act like bonus wind, a single gear should support something like a quern)

I dunno, this is the combat overhaul thread...but yeah... the combat is tied to the enemies, of course. And they're not that fun either and the storm is the biggest enemy event.

 

 

[Azi Karnage]

There is a huge desire for good civilization servers, with player driven consequences, where through skill or wordplay or job you can make your mark on history. And that desire gets crushed by combat devolving into a whack with metal contest that requires and asks for zero skill and that guarantees the win to whoever is best equipped.

[KoviBat]

Yes, we absolutely need a complete rework of combat. For one, combat mechanics need to be changed, enemy damage scaling with tiers is ridiculous to the point that Nightmare and Double-Headed Drifters deal more damage than bears do. The increased threat isn't felt in the gameplay. They aren't faster or slower, they don't have a larger or smaller hitbox. They just take and do more damage. Full parity, all variants having the same HP and doing the same damage, might be too aggressive, but they should all be comparable to their base version, even if slightly more deadly. It really just seems like padding to cover the fact that there are only four enemies. They're good designs, I especially like the Locusts, they're actually really neat on Passive, and I think having some neutral Locusts in some areas to introduce you to their concept early on would be cool. Maybe a little library ruin where they crawl around and organize books. And once you've met the hostile ones and see a neutral one moving around, you wonder if it's going to suddenly attack you. That uncertainty is a fun feeling and is certainly more nuanced than we have right now.

Back on track, we need more enemy variety. Something that fights differently. More humanoid enemies would be welcome, and they've been frequently suggested. They have room to scale power a bit more evenly. You can give them shields and armor as the players gear improves. Though armor would likely be introduced sparingly, and applied piecemeal. Some would get chestplates while others got gauntlets and stuff like that. Maybe even more advanced weapons like bows and crossbows the stronger they get. It also provides a reason to engage in combat in open spaces, instead of the close-quarters that caves, dungeons, ruins, and story locations do. That's where we run into the most enemies. With humanoid enemies, you could give them a fort on the surface for the player to storm, which gives bows a chance to shine in ranged combat with more open sightlines. We really just need something to change the rules and the scenery.

And yeah, bows suck. Most fighting, including hunting, is close-quarters, making bows rather redundant. They also don't do much damage in comparison to swords. The Combat Overhaul mod makes them semi-viable by having shots do more damage based on where you hit, but it's honestly a band-aid solution. They also treat the bow types wrong. There should be a Straight and Recurve version of both a Shortbow and a Longbow. Maybe even a Warbow if we want something a little goofy. Bigger bow, more sway, longer draw, bigger punch. Shortbows should also be viable from horseback. Or... Elkback. With difficulty, but possible. An accurate shot from any bow should hurt a lot, maybe even an instant kill, but they often do the same, or less, damage than their sword counterparts, which are more reliable for the materials you put into them.

I'm sure there's more issues for me to analyze, most of which are probably addressed by Combat Overhaul, but the combat needs a huge upgrade for Vanilla. It's just... not fun.

[CastIronFabric]

no...but with only a few exceptions I play games with combat off. I clocked in all my combat time for at least a decade more than 20 years ago.

 

 

Edited August 26, 2025 by CastIronFabric

[CastIronFabric]

On 5/13/2025 at 9:26 PM, Azi Karnage said:

There is a huge desire for good civilization servers, with player driven consequences, where through skill or wordplay or job you can make your mark on history. And that desire gets crushed by combat devolving into a whack with metal contest that requires and asks for zero skill and that guarantees the win to whoever is best equipped.

I think there is a opportunity cost here. They can work on either

A. Steam power

B. combat overhaul.

Yes they can do both but it would take longer for both if done in parallel and it would delay one or the other if done in series.

I want steam power

[Azi Karnage]

Steam power stinky, it would just add a layer to progression that isnt really needed vs combat would improve an entire aspect of the game start to finish and or create another aspect for competitive pvp

[ClearSkies]

I like what I've seen with combat overhaul, but I think what folks are missing from a game dev perspective is a variety in the mobs uniqueness.

Currently all the mobs are essentially:

A. Get in your face and slap you.
B. Throw stuff at you.
C. Summon stuff to get in your face and slap you and or throw stuff at you.

Combat Overhaul for me follows something more of a For Honor PVP style combat which we currently don't have that from the enemy AI. Not yet at least.

Not knowing what the future plans are, I figure what is missing and could fit with the story very well are a few of the following ideas.

A. A Forlorn/Blackguard Drifter. These fella's are actually armed, will utilize shields, and don't specifically go charging blindly. If groups exists, they would move as a unit, making them extremely dangerous for single player. How to mitigate this difficulty is for the player to have to have a Battle of Thermopylae by forcing the guards to come at them in a line to take them on one by one, or utilize weapons that would create a form of AOE damage, such as being able to use explosives more effectively. These enemy types would probably have a similar combat style of, let them swing, then take advantage of their opening, something similar to the N64 Zelda games and all.

B. Knights - Oh yes, lets just imagine a fast speeding knight drifter upon his drifter steed! Now you have a reason to really collect the cobwebs to lay a trap that slows the Knights down. But after you take out their steed, its pretty much the Forlorn/Blackguard battle.

C. Forlorn/Blackguard crossbowmen, archers. Again much like their fallen brothers of battle, these guys are more serious to take on than the bowtorn as they are equipped with weapons that are filth covered and utilize ammo much the same as the player. These drifters also will take you on with knives in close combat.

D. The coup de grace! Knight Commanders. These fellows are the ones who pull the tactical strings of the army. Perhaps to compensate, a Commanders logic block (invisible) is created with them to help compute their actions and how they move across the battlefield. Once a Commander is killed, the block vanishes and the fallen knights will now act closer to drifters/bowtorn with little to no tactical action because the commander was all that held them together.

To balance these few ideas (of many I have, but unfortunately couldn't implement myself as I am busing writing), the drops they have are all "Rust Tainted"

Rust Taint is a modifier that not only makes the equipment these people have low grade, but if you put them on, you begin to grow a "Rust Taint" meter that on full, you are now infected and get negative debuffs.

I figure this provides some ideas of dynamic and dangerous enemies that you would find over at abandoned forts and such, or might have a rare moment where 1 portal near you will spawn a troop of these fallen soldiers.

Now what is the benefit of finally using say, temporal gears, broken to dust and mixed with water? Why cleaning the Taint of course!

All this would provide a variety of challenges that give the players a bit more to handle and it gives us enemies that do a little more than slap your face and throw stuff.

[Toroic]

On 9/6/2025 at 1:56 PM, ClearSkies said:

I like what I've seen with combat overhaul, but I think what folks are missing from a game dev perspective is a variety in the mobs uniqueness.

Currently all the mobs are essentially:

A. Get in your face and slap you.
B. Throw stuff at you.
C. Summon stuff to get in your face and slap you and or throw stuff at you.

Combat Overhaul for me follows something more of a For Honor PVP style combat which we currently don't have that from the enemy AI. Not yet at least.

Not knowing what the future plans are, I figure what is missing and could fit with the story very well are a few of the following ideas.

A. A Forlorn/Blackguard Drifter. These fella's are actually armed, will utilize shields, and don't specifically go charging blindly. If groups exists, they would move as a unit, making them extremely dangerous for single player. How to mitigate this difficulty is for the player to have to have a Battle of Thermopylae by forcing the guards to come at them in a line to take them on one by one, or utilize weapons that would create a form of AOE damage, such as being able to use explosives more effectively. These enemy types would probably have a similar combat style of, let them swing, then take advantage of their opening, something similar to the N64 Zelda games and all.

B. Knights - Oh yes, lets just imagine a fast speeding knight drifter upon his drifter steed! Now you have a reason to really collect the cobwebs to lay a trap that slows the Knights down. But after you take out their steed, its pretty much the Forlorn/Blackguard battle.

C. Forlorn/Blackguard crossbowmen, archers. Again much like their fallen brothers of battle, these guys are more serious to take on than the bowtorn as they are equipped with weapons that are filth covered and utilize ammo much the same as the player. These drifters also will take you on with knives in close combat.

D. The coup de grace! Knight Commanders. These fellows are the ones who pull the tactical strings of the army. Perhaps to compensate, a Commanders logic block (invisible) is created with them to help compute their actions and how they move across the battlefield. Once a Commander is killed, the block vanishes and the fallen knights will now act closer to drifters/bowtorn with little to no tactical action because the commander was all that held them together.

To balance these few ideas (of many I have, but unfortunately couldn't implement myself as I am busing writing), the drops they have are all "Rust Tainted"

Rust Taint is a modifier that not only makes the equipment these people have low grade, but if you put them on, you begin to grow a "Rust Taint" meter that on full, you are now infected and get negative debuffs.

I figure this provides some ideas of dynamic and dangerous enemies that you would find over at abandoned forts and such, or might have a rare moment where 1 portal near you will spawn a troop of these fallen soldiers.

Now what is the benefit of finally using say, temporal gears, broken to dust and mixed with water? Why cleaning the Taint of course!

All this would provide a variety of challenges that give the players a bit more to handle and it gives us enemies that do a little more than slap your face and throw stuff.

I agree that more variety in mob type would be a good thing, but disagree that you need to have complex enemy mechanics to justify complex player mechanics.

Minecraft has relatively simple enemy mobs, and map to VS mobs with skeleton/bowtorn, zombie/drifter, spider/shiver but minecraft actually has more sophisticated combat with critical hits, shields that can fully block damage, and additional effects on weapons (such as cleave on swords).

Combat Overhaul does not make combat as complex as For Honor or Mount and Blade either.  Only some weapons have directional attacks and parrying and blocking is not directional.

Vanilla VS combat is very narrow in the sense that the safest and most effective way to fight almost everything is to kill it at range (long range with bow, or midrange with thrown spears) while being in highly mobile armor like chain because it has the least penalties and comparable protection to non-plate armor.

There's a lot of room to give the player in VS more combat mechanics for skill expression before you're required to make more complex combat encounters.

To be clear, I still support mobs with more varied and complex behaviors (and bowtorn fleeing when you close the distance is a good start) but combat needs a rework due to multiple issues:

1) Melee is relatively weak and higher risk compared to ranged
2) Most enemies are exclusively melee and easy to cheese with pillar strats or kiting
3) Rust creature loot is generally terrible
4) Shields are weak and unsatisfying to use
5) Armor types other than leather/gambeson/chain have too many penalties for the additional protection they provide.  Healing and moving faster inherently gives a defensive advantage that especially for a skilled player is far better than anything plate offers.

[CastIronFabric]

5 minutes ago, Toroic said:

I agree that more variety in mob type would be a good thing, but disagree that you need to have complex enemy mechanics to justify complex player mechanics.

Minecraft has relatively simple enemy mobs, and map to VS mobs with skeleton/bowtorn, zombie/drifter, spider/shiver but minecraft actually has more sophisticated combat with critical hits, shields that can fully block damage, and additional effects on weapons (such as cleave on swords).

Combat Overhaul does not make combat as complex as For Honor or Mount and Blade either.  Only some weapons have directional attacks and parrying and blocking is not directional.

Vanilla VS combat is very narrow in the sense that the safest and most effective way to fight almost everything is to kill it at range (long range with bow, or midrange with thrown spears) while being in highly mobile armor like chain because it has the least penalties and comparable protection to non-plate armor.

There's a lot of room to give the player in VS more combat mechanics for skill expression before you're required to make more complex combat encounters.

To be clear, I still support mobs with more varied and complex behaviors (and bowtorn fleeing when you close the distance is a good start) but combat needs a rework due to multiple issues:

1) Melee is relatively weak and higher risk compared to ranged
2) Most enemies are exclusively melee and easy to cheese with pillar strats or kiting
3) Rust creature loot is generally terrible
4) Shields are weak and unsatisfying to use
5) Armor types other than leather/gambeson/chain have too many penalties for the additional protection they provide.  Healing and moving faster inherently gives a defensive advantage that especially for a skilled player is far better than anything plate offers.

not only do I personally not like any of this nor even the concept of focusing on combat.

I do not think this game will ever expand the combat of this game into a deep system, that will be left for modders. I am rather confident of that, making this entire conversation...well...

 

I say all that but I said the same thing about Space Engineers during the early days given KEEN had stated that they did not want to focus on combat.

Edited September 8, 2025 by CastIronFabric

[Toroic]

11 minutes ago, CastIronFabric said:

not only do I personally not like any of this nor even the concept of focusing on combat.

I do not think this game will ever expand the combat of this game into a deep system, that will be left for modders. I am rather confident of that, making this entire conversation...well...

 

I say all that but I said the same thing about Space Engineers during the early days given KEEN had stated that they did not want to focus on combat.

It is entirely possible that VS never gets expanded combat and that the developers are happy with the current state.

It is also important for players to keep reiterating that the current state of combat, despite being very complex with creature and armor tiers, is very poorly designed in terms of actual options it provides for the player.

For realism reasons, copper, gold, silver armors are not effective.  Chain is somewhat expensive (and tedious to produce without a helvehammer) but similar in protection and substantially less penalties than scale or brigandine.  Given that most people when they find iron have a large vein, the cost really isn't a concern.

Have you ever seen someone use a club?  Or a scrap weapon of any variety?

There's a lot of "traps" with equipment that a skilled player will just ignore.  No one is wasting resin on wooden lamellar armor or weapons other than stone spears early on.  Copper is only for tools, and bronze is also good specifically for pickaxes and helvehammers so that you can rush iron.  Any extra is nice for spears.

Gear progression isn't intuitive, a lot of options aren't viable, and combat without mods tends to be very linear and the same strategy for every enemy type.

[LadyWYT]

1 minute ago, Toroic said:

a lot of options aren't viable

A lot of options boil down to...it depends. What is the player doing, and what are the player preferences? If one favors melee, they will probably want something more protective like scale or plate, especially if they are venturing underground where ranged combat isn't as useful. If traveling the surface, gambeson is better, but one might want to use bear hide armor for the looks or for the extra warmth in cold weather. 

7 minutes ago, Toroic said:

No one is wasting resin on wooden lamellar armor or weapons other than stone spears early on.

Wooden lamellar can be useful early on, especially if one is accident prone. It wouldn't stop a wolf or bear from mauling you, or let you tank a hoard of rust monsters, but it will soak up enough damage to allow you to survive situations you otherwise might not.

 

8 minutes ago, Toroic said:

Have you ever seen someone use a club?  Or a scrap weapon of any variety?

There's a lot of "traps" with equipment that a skilled player will just ignore.

I forget scrap weapons exist, and the club is probably the only thing I would absolutely agree is a trap. Looking at the wiki, some of the scrap weapons are Tier 2, which could be useful since weaker creatures will have a harder time shrugging off that damage. Make them all tier 2, and maybe boost the damage a bit on a scrap weapon or two, and now one has some great early game offense options, if they can get ahold of those scraps, that is.

For the club, just give it a chance to stun opponents for a moment. That gives it a useful niche early on, in that you can smack an opponent and have a better chance of escape, or have an easier time dispatching it if you can stun it enough.

12 minutes ago, Toroic said:

Copper is only for tools

Another situation of "it depends". A sufficiently skilled player can just rush bronze and iron, yes...that is also min-maxing and not everyone finds that fun. Additionally, a copper falx makes fighting off most surface threats much easier, and a copper spear has both more durability and a bit more attack than its stone age counterparts. Yes, one could just throw a bunch of stone spears, but spears take inventory, and you're doing no damage if you can't land your shots. Likewise, not everyone likes ranged combat.

 

16 minutes ago, Toroic said:

bronze is also good specifically for pickaxes and helvehammers so that you can rush iron.

Bronze is also good for weapons, for similar reasons as stated for copper. A bronze falx will make pretty short work of most every threat on the surface, and quite a few in the underground as well. Bronze spears are the best you can possibly get for that weapon type. When it comes to armor, bronze lamellar is cheap and protective, so it's worth crafting a set if one needs protection and is struggling to acquire iron or flax in quantity.

 

4 minutes ago, CastIronFabric said:

I would absolutely say the combat system is not complex at all. I know a lot of VS players come from minecraft and I am not familiar with that combat so if your observation there is related to comparing it to minecraft then I have no idea but regardless I would not agree that its complex.

I could be wrong on this and I was dead wrong when it came to Space Engineers but I think this game is more likely focus on building, survival aspects like thirst, trading, villagers etc rather than trying to become the next Mount and Blade.

At least I hope so.

 

Yeah, I'm inclined to agree here. I've played Minecraft for a looooong time(think I got my start when endermen and the hunger meter were first introduced), and while it has gotten some tweaks over the years to make it a bit more complex than it was before...it's by no means a complex system.  There's really no choice between armor types when it comes to combat--you always want the most protective option available, as there is no penalty for wearing it. There's no penalty for equipping things in your off-hand either, so if you don't have food there you have a shield. When it comes to melee weapons, swords have a sweep attack and faster attack speed, axes do more damage with a slower attack speed and can go through shields, and maces...I've not experimented with them, really, but I think the idea is to drop from a high place and use the momentum of gravity to smack a target silly(just don't miss or you take the fall damage instead of your target). Tridents are more of a novelty weapon. Ranged weapons...the bow is king and does exactly as expected. The crossbow can do more damage, to an extent, depending on what you load it with, but can't be fired nearly as quickly. Mix in things like potions and whatnot for status effects...in any case, there is some complexity there, but overall it's a very simple system that boils down to a couple of different choices and that's it. Vintage Story is very similar in that regard, but with a bit more nuance when it comes to gear type and material.

There's room for some improvements in VS combat, but I don't get the impression that combat is meant to be a focus, hence why the system is more similar to the other block game and not something like Mount and Blade or Valheim(which honestly is something of a joke in some ways, despite "complexity"). It's simple enough that pretty much anyone can understand what's going on, jump right in, and start having fun. There's no need to learn complex moves or train skills to use particular items. There is some difference between gear types, so the player does have some choices to make regarding what's appropriate for their particular situation. 

I will also point out that by overhauling the combat and making it much more complex, that shifts the balance of gameplay rather significantly and makes combat the focus instead of everything else. That might be enjoyable for players who absolutely love combat and don't care about other gameplay, but it's likely to be a turn-off for everyone else. Currently, the game is balanced around a variety of player types, and has something for pretty much everyone. For things not covered by the built-in game settings, there are mods(like Combat Overhaul) to provide the specific flavor of game someone might be looking for, without changing the experience for everyone else.

[CastIronFabric]

43 minutes ago, Toroic said:

It is entirely possible that VS never gets expanded combat and that the developers are happy with the current state.

It is also important for players to keep reiterating that the current state of combat, despite being very complex with creature and armor tiers, is very poorly designed in terms of actual options it provides for the player.

For realism reasons, copper, gold, silver armors are not effective.  Chain is somewhat expensive (and tedious to produce without a helvehammer) but similar in protection and substantially less penalties than scale or brigandine.  Given that most people when they find iron have a large vein, the cost really isn't a concern.

Have you ever seen someone use a club?  Or a scrap weapon of any variety?

There's a lot of "traps" with equipment that a skilled player will just ignore.  No one is wasting resin on wooden lamellar armor or weapons other than stone spears early on.  Copper is only for tools, and bronze is also good specifically for pickaxes and helvehammers so that you can rush iron.  Any extra is nice for spears.

Gear progression isn't intuitive, a lot of options aren't viable, and combat without mods tends to be very linear and the same strategy for every enemy type.

I do not think the combat system in this game is complex if I understand you correctly. Not complex at all.

 

Regardless, although I was dead wrong about this when it comes to Space Engineers my prediction (maybe becasue I want it this way) is that this game will not try to be the next Mount and Blade but instead focus on building, traders, villagers, thirst mechanics, story (although I am not a fan of this either I think the developers are)

[Toroic]

1 minute ago, CastIronFabric said:

I would absolutely say the combat system is not complex at all. I know a lot of VS players come from minecraft and I am not familiar with that combat so if your observation there is related to comparing it to minecraft then I have no idea but regardless I would not agree that its complex.

I could be wrong on this and I was dead wrong when it came to Space Engineers but I think this game is more likely focus on building, survival aspects like thirst, trading, villagers etc rather than trying to become the next Mount and Blade.

At least I hope so.

 

 

When I mean that combat is complex I mean the programming around armor is very (and I would argue needlessly) complex.

Answering the question of "which armor protects me best against X enemy" is non-trivial.

For example, let's compare two armors: Gambeson and Black Bronze Brigandine.

Which is better against surface drifters?  You would probably guess Black Bronze Brigandine, and would be right.

Which is better against double headed drifters?  You would probably guess Black Bronze Brigandine, and in reality it's Gambeson because Gambeson is less penalized by being attacked by a higher tier enemy than brigandine. 

Given that Brigandine is more expensive to produce and has massively higher penalties for wearing it, you would assume it would provide better protection.

The formulas that drive damage calculations in VS are very complicated, and making informed decisions about which armor will protect you best are not intuitive for new players or really anyone who hasn't looked over the tables on the wiki showing how this all works in the end.

[CastIronFabric]

3 minutes ago, Toroic said:

 

When I mean that combat is complex I mean the programming around armor is very (and I would argue needlessly) complex.

Answering the question of "which armor protects me best against X enemy" is non-trivial.

For example, let's compare two armors: Gambeson and Black Bronze Brigandine.

Which is better against surface drifters?  You would probably guess Black Bronze Brigandine, and would be right.

Which is better against double headed drifters?  You would probably guess Black Bronze Brigandine, and in reality it's Gambeson because Gambeson is less penalized by being attacked by a higher tier enemy than brigandine. 

Given that Brigandine is more expensive to produce and has massively higher penalties for wearing it, you would assume it would provide better protection.

The formulas that drive damage calculations in VS are very complicated, and making informed decisions about which armor will protect you best are not intuitive for new players or really anyone who hasn't looked over the tables on the wiki showing how this all works in the end.

disagree

namely because to be frank if you have iron chain mail, your done. Lets be frank, how many nightmares have you seen in a situation in which a long bow would be helpful? or any other situation for a long bow other than hunting?

anyway, I hope they do not expand on combat. I would perfer villagers and a better trader system.

Edited September 8, 2025 by CastIronFabric

[Toroic]

1 minute ago, CastIronFabric said:

disagree

namely because to be frank if you have iron chain mail, your done.

anyway, I hope they do not expand on combat. I would perfer villagers and a better trader system.

  The fact that you say that once you have iron chain, you're "done" really supports my argument because in practice there's a lot of false choice.

Combat in VS is both needlessly complex in terms of options and programming, and overly simple in practice.

4 minutes ago, LadyWYT said:

A lot of options boil down to...it depends. What is the player doing, and what are the player preferences? If one favors melee, they will probably want something more protective like scale or plate, especially if they are venturing underground where ranged combat isn't as useful. If traveling the surface, gambeson is better, but one might want to use bear hide armor for the looks or for the extra warmth in cold weather. 

Wooden lamellar can be useful early on, especially if one is accident prone. It wouldn't stop a wolf or bear from mauling you, or let you tank a hoard of rust monsters, but it will soak up enough damage to allow you to survive situations you otherwise might not.

 

I forget scrap weapons exist, and the club is probably the only thing I would absolutely agree is a trap. Looking at the wiki, some of the scrap weapons are Tier 2, which could be useful since weaker creatures will have a harder time shrugging off that damage. Make them all tier 2, and maybe boost the damage a bit on a scrap weapon or two, and now one has some great early game offense options, if they can get ahold of those scraps, that is.

For the club, just give it a chance to stun opponents for a moment. That gives it a useful niche early on, in that you can smack an opponent and have a better chance of escape, or have an easier time dispatching it if you can stun it enough.

Another situation of "it depends". A sufficiently skilled player can just rush bronze and iron, yes...that is also min-maxing and not everyone finds that fun. Additionally, a copper falx makes fighting off most surface threats much easier, and a copper spear has both more durability and a bit more attack than its stone age counterparts. Yes, one could just throw a bunch of stone spears, but spears take inventory, and you're doing no damage if you can't land your shots. Likewise, not everyone likes ranged combat.

 

Bronze is also good for weapons, for similar reasons as stated for copper. A bronze falx will make pretty short work of most every threat on the surface, and quite a few in the underground as well. Bronze spears are the best you can possibly get for that weapon type. When it comes to armor, bronze lamellar is cheap and protective, so it's worth crafting a set if one needs protection and is struggling to acquire iron or flax in quantity.

 

Yeah, I'm inclined to agree here. I've played Minecraft for a looooong time(think I got my start when endermen and the hunger meter were first introduced), and while it has gotten some tweaks over the years to make it a bit more complex than it was before...it's by no means a complex system.  There's really no choice between armor types when it comes to combat--you always want the most protective option available, as there is no penalty for wearing it. There's no penalty for equipping things in your off-hand either, so if you don't have food there you have a shield. When it comes to melee weapons, swords have a sweep attack and faster attack speed, axes do more damage with a slower attack speed and can go through shields, and maces...I've not experimented with them, really, but I think the idea is to drop from a high place and use the momentum of gravity to smack a target silly(just don't miss or you take the fall damage instead of your target). Tridents are more of a novelty weapon. Ranged weapons...the bow is king and does exactly as expected. The crossbow can do more damage, to an extent, depending on what you load it with, but can't be fired nearly as quickly. Mix in things like potions and whatnot for status effects...in any case, there is some complexity there, but overall it's a very simple system that boils down to a couple of different choices and that's it. Vintage Story is very similar in that regard, but with a bit more nuance when it comes to gear type and material.

There's room for some improvements in VS combat, but I don't get the impression that combat is meant to be a focus, hence why the system is more similar to the other block game and not something like Mount and Blade or Valheim(which honestly is something of a joke in some ways, despite "complexity"). It's simple enough that pretty much anyone can understand what's going on, jump right in, and start having fun. There's no need to learn complex moves or train skills to use particular items. There is some difference between gear types, so the player does have some choices to make regarding what's appropriate for their particular situation. 

I will also point out that by overhauling the combat and making it much more complex, that shifts the balance of gameplay rather significantly and makes combat the focus instead of everything else. That might be enjoyable for players who absolutely love combat and don't care about other gameplay, but it's likely to be a turn-off for everyone else. Currently, the game is balanced around a variety of player types, and has something for pretty much everyone. For things not covered by the built-in game settings, there are mods(like Combat Overhaul) to provide the specific flavor of game someone might be looking for, without changing the experience for everyone else.

You and I have had several back and forths with the core disagreement being if the situational options really are situational at all.

I always appreciate your detailed responses, you clearly have a lot of hours of experience in the game, and I believe you are a skilled VS player.

What I do not believe is that you are making decisions based on what weapons and armor to use based on a firm understanding of the underlying mechanics.

For example, you talk about weapon tier, but weapon tier has no effect on damage dealt to enemies other than the raw damage dealt.

I just confirmed this in a vanilla world against a corrupt drifter using a commoner.  In VS, enemies don't die at 0 hp, but when they drop below 0 hp.  5 thrown flint spears (5 damage each so 25 damage) and an obsidian spear (5.25 damage, for a total of 30.25 damage) will kill despite being all tier 0.  Similarly, 4 tin bronze spears (7.5 damage each, so 30 total) and a punch will kill a corrupt drifter despite being all tier 2.

Raising the tier of scrap weapons will do nothing to make them more viable for pve purposes, the only thing that matters is raw damage, which is why thrown spears are so overpowered at every stage of the game.  You could make a copper falx to do 3.75 damage per hit, or you could throw practically free flint spears for 5 damage each while having the advantage of range.

I don't think that VS needs to be Combat Overhaul level complex with enemies having different damage vulnerabilities (though I do like this feature to encourage players to use diverse weapon types), but having shields being able to actually block damage completely and having a parry mechanic would go a long way towards making melee more viable of a choice and having more skill expression in general instead of every fight being kiting with spears/bow in light armor.

To use a very specific example, I have pretty good aim in VS and find hunting with spears to be pretty easy.  I also find melee kiting enemies to be pretty easy.

In general, I find melee in VS to exclusively be useful for killing weak enemies who die in 1-2 hits, or when fighting one drifter or bowtorn at a time in an area with plenty of room to maneuver.  In most games a shield allows a player to stand and trade with enemies with good timing (such as in Valheim) and that's just not the case in VS.  Valheim's combat has plenty of flaws itself, but most people would agree Valheim's melee combat is more skill expressive and effective than in VS.

In all other cases, ranged attacks do more damage and are safer to use for only a trivial increase in cost.

There's definitely been an underlying idea that if VS combat was made more complex it would be less new player friendly, or that it would mean that enemy attack patterns need to get more complex to compensate.

I believe that is a false equivalency.  Minecraft barely has more deep combat than VS, but it is still objectively deeper, and while armor tiers have a very obvious and linear progression (and bosses are still very much ranged spamfests outside of some cheese strats) I don't think VS actually has more choice in armor sets in practice, with the vast majority of endgame combat being done in steel chain because even with the change to how healing efficiency works (making plate armor significantly less awful because you can still heal without taking it off), being able to move and shoot is just more useful.

The other thing that confuses me is that currently there are different damage types like blunt and piercing, but they have zero impact on damage dealt or received.  Why have a vestigial mechanic and do nothing with it?  Was the original intention to make damage types matter?

My concrete suggestions are that:

1) melee damage is increased at least 30% of what it is now as a base value (weapons like the club need bigger bonuses)
2) Active blocking with a shield is on right mouse instead of crouching
3) Shields can fully block attacks of their tier and below, with damage "leaking" through from higher tier attacks.
4) Movement penalties for all armor sets are reduced, with plate armor being about half what it is now.

Those 3 changes alone would put melee combat much more on par with ranged combat, and if the VS team wanted to make things like damage type matter vs certain enemies (as it does with combat overhaul) there would be a much stronger and diversely viable base of options to build on.

[LadyWYT]

3 minutes ago, Toroic said:

For example, you talk about weapon tier, but weapon tier has no effect on damage dealt to enemies other than the raw damage dealt.

I just confirmed this in a vanilla world against a corrupt drifter using a commoner.  In VS, enemies don't die at 0 hp, but when they drop below 0 hp.  5 thrown flint spears (5 damage each so 25 damage) and an obsidian spear (5.25 damage, for a total of 30.25 damage) will kill despite being all tier 0.  Similarly, 4 tin bronze spears (7.5 damage each, so 30 total) and a punch will kill a corrupt drifter despite being all tier 2.

Raising the tier of scrap weapons will do nothing to make them more viable for pve purposes, the only thing that matters is raw damage, which is why thrown spears are so overpowered at every stage of the game.  You could make a copper falx to do 3.75 damage per hit, or you could throw practically free flint spears for 5 damage each while having the advantage of range.

So maybe just give enemies damage resistance, depending on their tier, or overall type? For example, surface monsters should be easy to dispatch with most any weapon, but tier 2 monsters should require bronze equipment minimum before you can seriously deal with them. Tougher animals like bears and moose might be more resilient against stone weapons, which means a player will want to invest in metal weapons to deal with them more effectively. Players still have the option of using low tier weapons against high tier opponents, of course, since a stone weapon is better than nothing. But the idea is it'll be a less attractive choice to rely on the "cheap" route instead of investing a bit more into weaponry.

 

9 minutes ago, Toroic said:

There's definitely been an underlying idea that if VS combat was made more complex it would be less new player friendly, or that it would mean that enemy attack patterns need to get more complex to compensate.

I believe that is a false equivalency.  Minecraft barely has more deep combat than VS, but it is still objectively deeper, and while armor tiers have a very obvious and linear progression (and bosses are still very much ranged spamfests outside of some cheese strats) I don't think VS actually has more choice in armor sets in practice, with the vast majority of endgame combat being done in steel chain because even with the change to how healing efficiency works (making plate armor significantly less awful because you can still heal without taking it off), being able to move and shoot is just more useful.

Yeah, I can't really agree here when it comes to armor. Vintage Story has a lot more nuance when it comes to armor, since it matters what type you pick and what material you make it from. In Minecraft there is no reason not to obtain and wear the best armor(netherite) all the time.

What I would agree on though, is perhaps the stats need a bit more tuning in certain cases--plate armor is probably the worst offender there. I would also point out that there's a difference between how one equips themself for singleplayer versus multiplayer; in multiplayer it's a lot more viable to specialize for a particular role(plate for tanking, gambeson for even more accuracy for the ranged DPS).

There's also a case to be made for just picking a set you like and making it work, even if it doesn't have "the best" stats. Min-maxing will get the player the most bang for the buck in terms of cost versus performance, but also shoehorns the player into very specific choices, which isn't necessarily fun. Ideally, the player should be able to pick pretty much any option(of the appropriate tier for what they're dealing with) and be able to make it work easily enough. Some choices might be "subpar" to others if you crunch the numbers, but that doesn't mean they aren't viable or aren't fun.

23 minutes ago, Toroic said:

The other thing that confuses me is that currently there are different damage types like blunt and piercing, but they have zero impact on damage dealt or received.  Why have a vestigial mechanic and do nothing with it?  Was the original intention to make damage types matter?

This I'm honestly not sure about. It would be interesting if they expanded on the idea, with a "rock, paper, scissors" style of balance when it comes to damage types. However, that kind of complexity might also be better suited for mods. Hard to say for sure. It could be something that gets fleshed out more in the future, or it could just be the lingering remnants of an early combat concept, that has since been discarded and not yet patched out.

 

26 minutes ago, Toroic said:

1) melee damage is increased at least 30% of what it is now as a base value (weapons like the club need bigger bonuses)

Agree with the clubs bit, but I'm not sure about increasing melee damage across the board. To me, melee is already pretty strong, especially for specialists like Blackguard, so increasing the base damage by default only makes that class more of a monster than it is currently.

 

28 minutes ago, Toroic said:

2) Active blocking with a shield is on right mouse instead of crouching

Now this one I can agree with; it's more intuitive, and Minecraft handles this kind of concept well. The one change I would include here, is that if you have a shield equipped, you shouldn't be allowed to use a bow unless you unequip the shield first. Or perhaps allow the player to fire the bow, but make that action take priority so that you cannot block while using a ranged weapon...in addition to penalizing accuracy if you're firing with a shield equipped. Given how bulky shields are, players really shouldn't be able to use them and bow effectively at the same time.

 

32 minutes ago, Toroic said:

3) Shields can fully block attacks of their tier and below, with damage "leaking" through from higher tier attacks.

I can agree with this one too, though I would note that the player should be actively blocking with the shield in order to fully block the incoming attack. I don't think I would apply quite the same logic to armor, as there should be at least a bit of damage leaking through. It should be possible to die to low tier damage even with good equipment; it shouldn't be likely, of course, but it should be possible if one gets careless.

 

34 minutes ago, Toroic said:

4) Movement penalties for all armor sets are reduced, with plate armor being about half what it is now.

I don't think I would reduce the penalty for all armor sets, as most feel pretty balanced in that regard; however, I do agree that once again plate is the worst offender here. The movement penalty for plate could be reduced quite a bit, while still keeping it balanced, due to the expense of obtaining it and the healing penalty it applies. 

 

39 minutes ago, Toroic said:

if the VS team wanted to make things like damage type matter vs certain enemies (as it does with combat overhaul) there would be a much stronger and diversely viable base of options to build on.

Honestly, could probably steal a page from the Age of Empires 2 playbook and tweak armor stats to accommodate something like this, without getting overly complex. Essentially, there were two different armor stats for units in AoE2--plain armor and pierce armor. Plain armor applied to attacks in general, and mitigated a certain amount of incoming damage. Pierce armor was similar, but applied specifically to ranged attacks, so you could have a unit that was highly resistant to ranged damage but susceptible to melee(huskarls are notorious for this). Of course, anything can die to ranged if you shoot it enough times, but the idea is that it's not efficient to do so.

In any case, when applied to VS armor, chainmail(for example) could have good stopping power against attacks in general while retaining good accuracy stats, making it a solid choice for ranged characters. However, it might not be very good against piercing attacks, which means it's not a great choice for melee when compared to plate, and leaved ranged characters vulnerable to bowtorn(or an enemy with a pierce attack specialized to close distances quickly). Plate, on the other hand, would be great against piercing and general damage types, but wouldn't be ideal for ranged characters due to the movement and accuracy penalties.

[Thorfinn]

3 hours ago, Toroic said:

It is also important for players to keep reiterating that the current state of combat, despite being very complex with creature and armor tiers, is very poorly designed in terms of actual options it provides for the player.

This is a strong statement, and, unfortunately, nowhere do you back it up.

To assess whether or not something is a good design, you have to know what it was designed to do. It would be silly to say a wine glass is poorly designed because it does not make a good tool for hammering nails into boards.

Rather than say it is poorly designed, it is more correct to say that's not how you would have designed it.

Edited September 8, 2025 by Thorfinn