Jedi Archive
Thread: Lightsaber Damage
ColdFyre2112 wrote:
I know it may be a chore, but it can't be THAT hard to add another damage type. (used to be a programmer so no flames about how complicated it is... I know how tough it can be)
Better yet, why not make LS damage be ALL types of damage? Wouldn't that be just a quick numbers tweak?
It would be a huge undertaking. Not only would every creature have to have their resistances changed to make way for a new damage type, but every armor and every player as well. No matter what, they cant have a damage type without having damage resistance to it. Id just prefer that they spent the time and effort changing something that isnt completely superficial. Does it really effect your gameplay to have a saber do kinetic vs. its own damage type knowing that they would just add it to composite (a Cortosis layer probably)?
That stated, if this is a big issue for you, then you have to keep at it. Dont let the trolls stop you from crossing that bridge.
How I feel Sabers should be implemented (granted, not a perfect strategy)
Lightsabers should lose their inherent AP2 status
Training sabers be AP0 (maybe AP1) Kinetic Damage
In addition to a crystals normal stats, an additional stat is added to the crystal. This stat is a damage type: kinetic, stun, etc. If a certain gem with a certain damage type is used in a saber, that saber gains the damage type of that crystal. Kinetic therefore is not replaced, but in addition to Kinetic, you get additional damage types.For each additional crystal of the same damage type are used in later construction of the saber, you would gain AP.
For Example,one more kinetic, or 2 energy, 2 stun etc. the saber would gain one level of AP. So if the first crystal was a kinetic crystal, and the training saber was AP1, the 2nd gen would be AP2. If a 2nd gen saber was constructed with a stun crystal, the 2nd gen saber would retain AP1, but a 3rd gen saber made with this 2nd gen saber and another stun crystal would gain AP2, climaxing with a AP3 saber, of course.
When damage is tabulated, a check can be done against the target, what the least resist of the target is, or maybe a random resist, and the saber does that type of damage.
I know the Jedi Correspondant asked for a poll regarding whether you would want stun damage if lightsaber damage was not possible. I think this is a very good alternative.
Message Edited by Phear_Phaktor on 02-26-2004 03:06 PM
The stun debate was posed before, and hopefully enough people understood that stun does not damage layers, so stun sabers would be PvE worthless, in a way. In my example above, the 3rd gen saber would be a stun/kinetic saber, capable of dealing both damage types. How this would be implemented in code would be up to the devs, seeing as how I am not a secular programmer.
Isacoast wrote:
Phear_Phaktor wrote:
How I feel Sabers should be implemented (granted, not a perfect strategy)
Lightsabers should lose their inherent AP2 status
Training sabers be AP0 (maybe AP1) Kinetic Damage
In addition to a crystals normal stats, an additional stat is added to the crystal. This stat is a damage type: kinetic, stun, etc. If a certain gem with a certain damage type is used in a saber, that saber gains the damage type of that crystal. Kinetic therefore is not replaced, but in addition to Kinetic, you get additional damage types.For each additional crystal of the same damage type are used in later construction of the saber.
For Example,one more kinetic, or 2 energy, 2 stun etc. the saber would gain one level of AP. So if the first crystal was a kinetic crystal, and the training saber was AP1, the 2nd gen would be AP2. If a 2nd gen saber was constructed with a stun crystal, the 2nd gen saber would retain AP1, but a 3rd gen saber made with this 2nd gen saber and another stun crystal would gain AP2, climaxing with a AP3 saber, of course.
When damage is tabulated, a check can be done against the target, what the least resist of the target is, or maybe a random resist, and the saber does that type of damage.
I know the Jedi Correspondant asked for a poll regarding whether you would want stun damage if lightsaber damage was not possible. I think this is a very good alternative.
Stun seems like a good alternative when first mentioned. First thing that comes to mind is we'll actually be able to penetrate Composite and Ubese armors.
But I ask you this, how are we supposed to destroy a lair? Stum dmg weapons do not do any damage to creature lairs.
AtPlay wrote:
damage type knowing that they would just add it to composite (a Cortosis layer probably)?
That stated, if this is a big issue for you, then you have to keep at it. Dont let the trolls stop you from crossing that bridge.
Actually i noticed today that there was a "Cortosis silcastic ore" available on bria right now.. So it's actually possible that the damage type does exist and is just not implemented along with the protection against it.
Message Edited by Midros on 02-26-2004 03:32 PM
Midros wrote:
IMO, LS damage should= energy w/ high armor piercing. why would devs make LS "UB3R 1337 LIGHTSABER JEDI DAMAGE"? Not only would that take a lot of time and effort as they would have to add resistances to everything in the game, it's also stupid. In the movies, they didn't say "ultimate better than anything else sword" they said "LASER sword when referring to the LS before they knew what the real name was"hmm... "LASER rifle"... "LASER carbine"... they both do energy, why should LS be any different?
Message Edited by Midros on 02-26-2004 03:32 PM
Isacoast wrote:
O.k, so we'll lay off the E.U examples for a sec...
How many things in the original Trilogy did you see stop a saber? Hm... only thing I can think of is another saber, Vader's.
One more thing (as mentioned in my 1st post).
It's an ore of some type.. I don't remember the name. But it's in the Black Fleet Crisis trilogy I believe. The one where Luke proposes to Mara Jade. Thrawns old base/castle was made of the stuff and highly resistant to blaster fire as well
Midros wrote:
IMO, LS damage should= energy w/ high armor piercing. why would devs make LS "UB3R 1337 LIGHTSABER JEDI DAMAGE"? Not only would that take a lot of time and effort as they would have to add resistances to everything in the game, it's also stupid. In the movies, they didn't say "ultimate better than anything else sword" they said "LASER sword when referring to the LS before they knew what the real name was"hmm... "LASER rifle"... "LASER carbine"... they both do energy, why should LS be any different?
Message Edited by Midros on 02-26-2004 03:32 PM
so your argument is that a LS should be as weak as any wep with 'laser' in front of it? Nah...
I still like the idea of a LS doing its own type of dmg, but since I've been slapped around about it, next best is to make it -all- dmg types...
but that's just one person's opinion
Phear_Phaktor wrote:
The stun debate was posed before, and hopefully enough people understood that stun does not damage layers, so stun sabers would be PvE worthless, in a way. In my example above, the 3rd gen saber would be a stun/kinetic saber, capable of dealing both damage types. How this would be implemented in code would be up to the devs, seeing as how I am not a secular programmer.
I like the suggestion that training sabers do kinetic and other generations do stun. It makes some sense that a "training" saber would be far less dangerous to its inexperienced wielder than a true lightsaber, and it's a decent interim position.
Attacking a lair with a training saber is a slow process until the 5x damage kicks in, but it's not all that show (spawening defenders lower the lairs integrity pretty fast). And it saves wear and tear on the main saber anyway, and most of us try to control our lair damage anyway, to coax as many defenders from the lair as possible.
Lightsabers getting their damage typewould be ideal, but there are too many things that need fixing in this game to worry about it.
I think everyone is missing the import of my post. I used stun as an example. Using the previous method, you could have a Gen 5AP1 stun/acid/kinetic/heat/restraint saber, or a Gen 5 AP3 Kinetic/acid/cold. I used stun only as an example. Some baddies have high stun resists, and you don't want to be stuck using a stun saber against it. Plus, AT-ST's are invulnerable versus stun. The arguement against stun sabers can be carried over to the kinetic saber as well. A new damage type, or a multiple damage saber would be totally sweet, IMHO.
drunknmunky718 wrote:
Phear_Phaktor wrote:
The stun debate was posed before, and hopefully enough people understood that stun does not damage layers, so stun sabers would be PvE worthless, in a way. In my example above, the 3rd gen saber would be a stun/kinetic saber, capable of dealing both damage types. How this would be implemented in code would be up to the devs, seeing as how I am not a secular programmer.
I like the suggestion that training sabers do kinetic and other generations do stun. It makes some sense that a "training" saber would be far less dangerous to its inexperienced wielder than a true lightsaber, and it's a decent interim position.
Attacking a lair with a training saber is a slow process until the 5x damage kicks in, but it's not all that show (spawening defenders lower the lairs integrity pretty fast). And it saves wear and tear on the main saber anyway, and most of us try to control our lair damage anyway, to coax as many defenders from the lair as possible.
Lightsabers getting their damage typewould be ideal, but there are too many things that need fixing in this game to worry about it.