e8747e6c4e0ceedb55ae841fe9

If they came to the surface, I think they should have a similar spawn rate as the double headed drifter, functioning essentially as a boss. A normal temporal storm would end up feeling more like a raid. Also, by break down, I don't mean the block has to be destroyed, just that the pathway has to be opened for other monsters to return. Maybe afterwards players could take barely a board or two and a nail or two and fix everything, but it would take some time to do so it wouldn't be an easy thing to fix on the fly during a storm. I also don't think monsters should pursue breaking anything down unless breaking it down paths to a player, otherwise it should just ignore them.

I feel like the serrated blade drifters should be able to break down doors. I also think it would be cool if the bell shivers would charge through large gates, and then start ringing afterwards so it feels like your base is actually under siege of sorts.

This is still hammering my grievance with damage types. It's just a numbers game, it's literally just paying attention to weapon and enemy stats and picking the rock paper scissors matchup. That is unbelievably boring imo, especially compared to different playstyles that emerge from different distinct weapons that actually feel different to play with, and are better at different scenarios rather than different resistances. I'd like unique playstyles, not unique damage types, because the damage types doesn't actually change the game all that much, other than everyone has to be a generalist. In a team fight, it just comes down to making sure your team represents all damage types, and then focusing the rock-paper-scissors matchups you can win. Against a boss, it's no different than the current gameplay, other than everyone picks the right tools for the situation, and then wales on the boss the same way we do now. There's marginal amounts of forethought required to optimize damage, but past that point this doesn't encourage anything new. Besides, the devs said they wanted to keep their system distinct from CO, and I feel like the game should try to focus on creating more systems that work organically within VS for all members of the community. For the people who want the MMMORPG VS experience, they should join a server and go play with CO. For the people who want to build and still want a challenge of defending themselves from the onslaught of temporal monsters, there should be something that makes combat more dynamic or interesting when the combat happens. It should be a system that rewards thinking about the combat and gameplay, when you're in the moment, and using your tools effectively, playing around the terrain and enemy behaviors, rather than just recognizing their types and what weapon to hit them with.

Something like this is fine for an MMO or an RPG where your expected to work alongside teammates with diverse kits, or carry a diverse set of weapons on you yourself. However, in VS you run into a problem, where if the stats are designed like you mentioned, and you can comfortably take a weapon into most encounters, then the whole idea of damage types seems pretty negligible to begin with. It basically just comes down to 'pick the enemy you don't want to fight, ok here's the weapon that has the best stats against them' in a game as simple as VS (combat wise). The alternative forces this situation where you need to have a diverse set of damage to be able to confront a variety of situations, or you need to swap weapons depending on the encounter or trip your making. While I think this is fine to a certain degree, I think it needs to come alongside the rest of what I've mentioned, where it needs to reinforce new playstyles and new situations made possible by various weapons, which are then enhanced by damage types if the devs so please. I still don't know if they add enough in that situation to warrant coding it in, but I could see a situation where it works out. If more of the system comes down to focusing on the damage types and resistances, it's assuredly not going to make combat much more interesting imho, and in fact, I feel like it's much easier to add this system in a way that makes it either annoying or unnecessary.

Ok this post has given me a little more to think about damage types and I think get to brass tacks over the kind of combat additions I think are beneficial to the game. These damage types are interesting or warranted if they do actually result in qualitative outcomes in combat, and contextualize new interactions with the environment. For example, to refer to my previous idea about stunning shivers by hitting them in the head while their mouth is open, maybe this can only be performed with a thrust/piercing attack. Blunt attacks provide stun to enemies, and can actually upset the environment, meaning if you were in a mine, or near a hillside, you could intentionally swing a blunt instrument at an unstable region and force the terrain to collapse on your opponent. I don't really know for a 'slash' style of attack, to me it's the default so it should be the standard across most weapons and attacks, and thus shouldn't really do anything special, maybe you can damage the limbs of enemy combatants best with slashing attacks, leaving them crippled in various ways, but idk. Either way, the biggest thing is that if you add a new damage type, the biggest contributions are going to be new types of interactions with npcs and the environment, otherwise I think they're going to be an added annoyance for most players.

This type of weapon attack diversity I think is a lot more organic to the game, I don't think directional inputs are a good idea, if not especially to just keep the vanilla game distinct from combat overhaul, but this makes more sense to me. I still don't understand the point of the damage types, it especially feels like redundant bloat when all of the weapons are made to perform an attack that does it, and tying those attacks to movement just make everything more frustrating because now, to do optimal damage to an enemy, I might have to exclusively hit it while back pedaling, which could be annoying. To me, it should function more like this: cut: default attack, pretty much what's in the game thrust: moving/sprinting forward, more committed attack, higher crit, if they're adding hitboxes to the game, then improved headshot damage, also is a longer animation to compensate pommel strike: walking backward, quick slap move that does little damage but provides enemies with a little more hitstun. This is more what I think fits in the game, different utilities for different attacks, rather than different damage types. I definitely don't think there should be more than 3 per weapon.

See, to me this is too much. I like the idea of crouching causing a more defensive attack stance, one that works along side shields. Like I mentioned before, this is very easy to see with spears since irl when you walk around with a spear, you're mostly skipping around and abusing the reach of the spear to tap and harass opponents, whereas when you plant down with a shield to hold a position, it's more about using the spear to maintain distance and create even more of a defensive barrier. As a result, I thought it would make sense if when you're standing, the spear could attack a little faster, it does less damage, and has little knockback or hitstun, whereas while you're crouched, the spear attack is closer to the one in game, but physically pushes enemies to the end of the spears reach. I think anything past 2 different attacks though is getting too complicated in general, I think it's good that each weapon have a little more to it, but in general, I think more diversity in combat utility should come from combinations of different items in your hotbar, rather than combinations of different mechanics in each weapon.

I'm telling yall, firecrackers would be tons of fun.

I think the inherent reason why I don't like different damage types is because it feels like a very cheap way to force weapon diversity. The weapons don't actually function any different other than you run into an enemy where your weapon is just straight up worse and you should use it, not because the enemy behaves a certain way or is in a certain environment, but simply because the numbers changed. It complicates the game in a boring way imo, because now you have to pay attention to these stats, rather than the gameplay situations your entering and strategizing around that.

I forgot to mention one extra thing that I've honestly thought about modding myself, I wish that the temporal and rusty gear necklaces functioned to attract or deter aggro for when you're fighting along side other players. The armor and class system seems to encourage having certain players kitted for melee combat and full plate armor, and other players in lighter armor equipped with ranged weapons, but as it stands the enemies will just totally ignore the armored player and b-line it straight for the archers, even while the melee player is wailing on the enemy who's focused on the archer. I'd like the temporal gear necklace to attract enemies more, so they tend to focus on damaging temporal necklace wearers, and the rusty gear necklace is the reverse. That's not to say the rusty gear necklace would make you more stealthy or anything like that, and I think it should only work on monsters, not wildlife, but it's still annoying that you can't properly cover your lighter weight teammates in this game. It's especially annoying when you can't catch up to the shivers in heavy armor, so if you fail to divert their attention in a few hits, your ranged-focused allies are just screwed most of the time, unless they just decide to carry around heavy armor themselves which feels kinda cheap imo. It would be one thing if the shivers actually flanked us when were in a group, I wouldn't complain about shivers spawning behind us and attacking archers first, but it's something else entirely when enemies will run straight past the black guard in full armor just to destroy my friend playing the hunter.

I guess my biggest comparison to souls titles is that the dodge should not have I-frames and the dodge should not travel as far as the dodges in those games, instead it should only go a block or two and should have a slight cool-down so you can't spam the crap out of it. As for parrying, it should be only a defensive move, it shouldn't do anything to the attacking enemy, only stop you from taking damage imo. I agree with what you said though, I think before I emphasized too much that it shouldn't be relied upon too much, but realistically what you're saying makes more sense to me. If you're overwhelmed by an onslaught of enemies, being able to time parries is not going to give you an out, but mid combat, combined with effective positioning, parrying and dodges should be contextually right for discrete instances of damage to keep the fight going.

I think for dodging, I'd like something akin to 'GTFO' oddly enough. It's not at all a game you would normally think of in the same conversation as Vintage Story, but essentially when moving side to side, or backwards, if you hit space, instead of jumping you make a short side step. I like this better than the current panic jumps we have, and I also generally think that whatever combat develops in the future, it isn't one that should be heavily dodge-based. Dodges should exist to delay the inevitable, avoid a projectile, or a particularly dangerous attack, but it shouldn't be something you can consistently perform as to be totally relied upon. Similar to what I mentioned above for parrying, I think it's something that can assist in decisive moments of intense action, but as opposed to many other titles that feature dodging, it shouldn't be a mechanic that decides whether or not you win or lose a fight, I think that should come more from being able to navigate the situation, manipulate the environment, and position yourself well against an onslaught of enemies. Again, to compare to GTFO, while you can dodge to avoid specific attacks, if you want to survive combat, positioning well to avoid getting hit, and timing your sprints/managing your stamina is far more important since the dodge is somewhat limited. That's not to say it isn't useful, it's especially nice for dodging projectiles, but mastering dodging in the game is mostly a bonus. Mastering the dodge mostly means avoiding situational losses rather than it is giving you consistent wins like in souls titles.

In terms of the games responsiveness, it seems like the devs are very aware of that problem and that's why they're starting with hitbox and possibly hit registration changes first so any more complicated systems aren't competing with weird network jank. As for parrying mechanics, I'd like a simple mechanic where timing a crouch with the shield guarantees you'll get the full damage mitigation on the shield, but I don't think the game should have a stagger system. I'd mostly like a better defensive option to exist for running around unarmored, one that maybe isn't the most consistent but will give you just the small amount of sustain you need to end a fight quickly when you're exploring, or when you get caught by surprise during a storm or in a cave.

YES this is what I'm talking about, this is tons of fun. I especially love interactions like the wolves being afraid of fire, or the bowtorns hurting when they fall over. I think if that's the case though, the bowtorns should not be able to run as fast as they do. Seriously love the wolf interaction, I'm surprised this isn't already some part of the game considering the game takes heavy inspiration from the long dark. I also love the idea of drifters being more like bandits that maybe want to take things from you, more than stock enemies, but I definitely think that the higher level drifters should be more aggressive, otherwise lore locations and temporal storms would be paced a little weirder. Maybe the drifters become more aggressive in groups, thinking they can all take you head on and loot your corpse or something, but alone or in small groups they're more neutral.

I like Zelda as an inspiration much more than dark souls or valheim. As someone who loves dark souls, I don't think this game is complicated enough mechanically to allow for 'movesets' even, which is why I place more emphasis on some subtler changes in animation that mostly come down to the timing of attacks. Similar to a game like zelda, this essentially boils down to having a basic charge attack, or one extra move per weapon that has a niche situation where it's more optimal than just flurrying your sword. I further prefer Zelda's style of combat because Zelda often utilizes creative enemy design, and distinct items to create fun combat situations, rather than arming the player's weapons with complicated move sets. For this reason, I think that have a few more items that are combat related would be more interesting than, say, adding clubs, maces, etc. Referring to souls games, I think that I honestly would rather have a Sekiro style system, where your default attacks are suplemented with some additional tools on your belt that force new interactions from enemies. If you had fire crackers, flares, maybe if landing a headshot with stones stunned enemies for a time, different unique interactions with distinct items is more interesting than just having more weapons. This is why I prefer a Zelda inspired combat system over a Dark Souls one. It's reasons like this that I honestly am not a big fan of Combat Overhaul, I think that the mordhau/chivalry style combat conflicts with the game's more casual style enemy and player design, and organically integrating a system close to CO's style of combat require a tremendous amount of effort to restructure the flow of the game that I don't think the devs should undergo.