Development Info Underrail 2: Infusion Dev Log #9: New Combat System

[Stavrophore]

I think it would be good if every enemy had their own detection system based on vision and sound, instead of hive mind reponse, unless its waranted like hive mind creatures or enemies with radios.

 

[Sweeper]

It appears that this system is functionally real-time with pause, with pausing being automatic and mandatory at the conclusion of every player action. Is that correct?

...
So, it's turn based in real time?

 

[BlackPlate]

You can explain some of it as people near you shouting 'he's running to the left' and such, but yeah it gets ridiculous when an enemy on the other side of the map pinpoints where you are, even when the people who last saw you died two turns ago and you moved halfway across the map in stealth.
Along with removing the hivemind detection, some kind of a 'Alerted' buff to detection once you do a mid-combat stealth play would make stealth builds bridge that gap between 'walking in front of them without being seen' out of combat and 'instantly detected in combat, regardless of everything'. It even feels like Styg wanted to do something like that, even now enemies that almost detected you and are moving in will throw flares around you. Death Stalkers existing at all, as well.
Sound-based detection is probably where he gave up on the implementation of that idea, sight-based detection is wonky as it is. Problems with stealth in general, namely the anti-cheese mechanic involving leaving the map point to me never getting stealth combat but I can hope

 

[Infinitron]

It appears that this system is functionally real-time with pause, with pausing being automatic and mandatory at the conclusion of every player action. Is that correct?

No, not really. Look at the video, enemies don't do things at the same time as the player.

Micro-turns, like a roguelike.

 

[Marte1980]

Considering the changes that the developer wants to implement in the new game, I guess the only good thing that's gonna come out of it is that hopefully he's gonna stop making changes to Underrail 1's gameplay!

 

[toro]

I will be honest, the more I think about the new combat system, the more I hate it.

The new combat system is designed to address all these and more. It is a combination of traditional roguelike combat, where turns are still sequential but short with atomic actions, and simultaneous turns combat. So here is the basic rundown of how it works:

• Under normal conditions, game is in real-time mode.
• When required due to the presence of hostile entities, the game will transition in and out of combat mode. Usually player will not be able to activate combat manually except under special conditions.
• In combat mode, everything is paused until the player performs an action. The action takes a certain amount of time and this amount is granted to all non-player participants to use for their new or ongoing actions (such as moving, attacking, activating special abilities).
• When exactly this time is granted to the NPCs is critical as sometimes they might act immediately to interfere with the player. This time may also be granted in bulk or in smaller amounts (e.g. channeled abilities such as bandaging).
• Player is free to act and give additional time to NPCs unless he is "blocked" by an ongoing relevant NPC action. An enemy trying to move out of the player's melee range is relevant and the player must "respect" their available time; a neutral crab roaming on the other side of the map is not relevant and it can do what it pleases.
• NPCs usually won't block each other. Meaning they will act simultaneously for the most part.
• Because NPCs are just executing their real-time AI while stopping for time allowance, there is no need for a separate AI implementation, and they can also take the time when player is acting to "think" about their situation. That is, their AI state machine is running at all times.

This is a bunch of gibberish. If you cannot described something in a few clear ideas then you've got nothing.

The new combat system is supposed to fix the following issues:

Reactivity, or rather lack of it. As Underrail veterans know all too well, if you happen to stumble into combat with multiple powerful enemies and lose an initiative roll, you are going to get "100-to-0-ed" more often than not, probably getting stunned in the process as well. This is because giving a long turn to a powerful character in this system, without any opportunity to react to or counteract their actions, puts the party on the receiving end into considerable disadvantage. While in party-based combat, you could tolerate having one of two of your characters nuked or temporary disabled, if you are controlling a single character, this is often an unrecoverable situation. To a lesser extent, same is true with the player character getting the jump on the NPCs, though often, unlike the player, they can afford to lose a unit or two.

It doesn't fixes anything on this department because the more agile character should always move faster.

The initiative roll in U1 was not broken, the action points inflation was the culprit for all the bad things. When your character is able to attack 10+ times a turn then we are no longer talking about a turn based combat system.

It's like playing chess where a player can do 10 moves before the other guy is allowed to do a move. I love Underrail but the combat system is broken as fuck. I have no illusions about this. The thing is: it doesn't matter because it's fun.

Dual time modes. Every active thing in the game requires two implementation for polar opposite modes. One is the real-time mode where things happen simultaneously and can and should be reacted to immediately, and the other one consists of long sequential turns where each actor can only react to the end state of the previous turn. This goes beyond the combat itself and goes into general AI and the behavior of the environment itself.

I call bullshit on this one. Fake issue.

Sluggishness. This system scales badly with large number of participants if the player is controlling only a single character. The ratio of player waiting to player acting gets worse and worse with each NPC added to the encounter. Even worse, because there is a need to keep all the combat turn-based in order to avoid having to implement and maintain real-time combat AI, sometimes in Underrail you are just a passive observer of third-party combat.

And micro-managing each action will improve ... jack shit!?

Maybe don't implement locusts hives? Maybe improve encounters quality? Maybe balance the AP and skills inflation? Maybe ...

I found the Ambush mechanics to be brilliant. Thanks to the new system, these mechanics are bye bye. Glass cannon builds are fucked. And micro-managing each action will make the combat as exciting as watching warts popping up on a pig's arse.

Basically with this new combat we have a case of "the remedy is worse than the disease". There is no way the game will be released with whatever was displayed in the alpha video and it will not backfire in some form.

I know Styg doesn't care but his creations are not catering to normies and you can only ruin your reputation once.

 

[Stavrophore]

Nah he is right, initiative save scumming is too annoying on domination, or workarounds around that when you play tin can characters. And after first encounter and combat start, initative doesn't play any additional role afaik.

I'm glad that Styg is experimenting because i want novelty, people shit about how games are shit and same, and when someone is trying something different then its bad. If you dont like it, return to the hundreds of trash rpgs with RTWP combat or to the regular turn based stuff. We might get masterpiece or flop, but that's the risk with trying something new, instead of sitting in the comfort zone.

 

[Jrpgfan]

Nah he is right, initiative save scumming is too annoying on domination, or workarounds around that when you play tin can characters. And after first encounter and combat start, initative doesn't play any additional role afaik.

I'm glad that Styg is experimenting because i want novelty, people shit about how games are shit and same, and when someone is trying something different then its bad. If you dont like it, return to the hundreds of trash rpgs with RTWP combat or to the regular turn based stuff. We might get masterpiece or flop, but that's the risk with trying something new, instead of sitting in the comfort zone.

I don't think a change in the core mechanics was necessary. The combat system is already meaty enough to allow him to get creative with the encounters without the game feeling too "more of the same"(which isn't a bad thing per se, mind you).

The "if it ain't broken, don't fix it" proverb is almost never wrong. I hope this is one of the rare exceptions for the sake of the game.

 

[BlackPlate]

It doesn't fixes anything on this department because the more agile character should always move faster.

This shouldn't be an issue if the combat is moving closer to roguelikes, since there faster characters move and attack for less points, thereby doing more actions per turn. The same is true in Underrail with AP cost reductions and having bigger MP/AP pools per turn. Higher initiative is generally linked to faster characters. I can't imagine the big brain decision to scrap this in favour of anything else.

The initiative roll in U1 was not broken, the action points inflation was the culprit for all the bad things. When your character is able to attack 10+ times a turn then we are no longer talking about a turn based combat system.

This is true, but the new system addresses this with its smaller turns, doesn't it? It looks to me that you misinterpreted what he is saying by focusing on the word initiative, since you are talking about the same thing, big AP pool leading to the player getting instagibbed and vice versa. Initiative will still be a thing if I'm reading what he is saying right, from this

When exactly this time is granted to the NPCs is critical as sometimes they might act immediately to interfere with the player. This time may also be granted in bulk or in smaller amounts (e.g. channeled abilities such as bandaging).

It seems like initiative will be based on enemy/action taken, not just at the start of combat to determine turn order and no longer being important.
IF I am imagining this correctly, let's look at an example of a big guy with a hammer attacking a fast Rathound. He attack the Rathound with a big, meaty smash ability that takes 30 clicks with a range of 1, for argument sake. The fast Rathound is immediately given 30 clicks of time, in which it gets to act. If it can move one tile back within 30 clicks, it does so and ends its turn, Hammer guy missed it. If it cannot move one tile within 30 clicks and ends its turn, it's hit. If it isn't a fast Rathound but a slow one, it might not even get its 30 click turn and Hammer special will always hit. If such is the case, both reactivity and initiative will be improved via smaller AP pool per turn and initiative changes, respectively.
Clicks and AP are synonymous in that example, just wanted a clearer link between speed and activity time, clicks sounded good.

And micro-managing each action will improve ... jack shit!?

Compared to roguelikes it does feel sluggish. Everyone does their big moves and the situation between your turns feels like it changed drastically with little input from you. With the new system it 'should' feel like you are constantly evaluating the state of battle and reacting accordingly instead of treating every new turn like a new combat encounter, with longer fights against many enemies feeling more like a gauntlet of different fights rather than one continuous encounter.

I might be looking through rose-tinted glasses but I can genuinely see the combat feeling better.

 

[nimateb]

I find the lack of trust in Styg on this forum very disturbing.

He has done good in the past, but I'm not going to worship him. He's made poor design decisions in the past, too. And even if he hadn't, humans aren't infallible. It certainly isn't unheard of for sequels to great games to end up worse, especially if the devs decide to reinvent the wheel. That I'm willing to give the combat system a chance even though he's changed it for one that I generally don't enjoy should show that there's goodwill here.

If Styg left original systems from UR in place, many people would complain that the game is too samey as the first one. You can't please all people.

Would they? I doubt it. I don't remember ever hearing anyone say that the turn based combat should be replaced. Adjusted or rebalanced, sure, but not replaced. There are many ways to expand upon a game while keeping the core combat. The new interactivity, enemy type, gear, crafting and so on that we've seen would have worked just fine with turn based combat, after all.

Beauty is not about perfection, it's about intrigue and this is new and unknown. Let the man pursue his vision, he's earned it.

 

[Stavrophore]

I don't think a change in the core mechanics was necessary. The combat system is already meaty enough to allow him to get creative with the encounters without the game feeling too "more of the same"(which isn't a bad thing per se, mind you).

The "if it ain't broken, don't fix it" proverb is almost never wrong. I hope this is one of the rare exceptions for the sake of the game.

No, i think given vast extensiveness of UR and expansions, the enemy types and their abilities were practically exhausted, and not much new could be brought to the table. With rehashing combat, even similar enemies could bring novelty. We are talking about the game taking place in same universe, so it's not like Styg could invent some super novel stuff within the legacy UR1 framework. Supposedly north underrail is more advanced, so even so, we could had seen some new shield types, or maybe short distance teleportation or few other tricks, but ultimately it would be same enemies, same guns, same abilities. Now we still dont know about perks, but just changing combat system forces you to redesign all perks even if you intent to keep some from UR1. I think its a good change, and it will force Styg to rehash and adapt a lot of legacy stuff to new circumstances, giving us a completely fresh experience. Otherwise i guarantue you, that if he had stayed with old perks+ couple of new, old system, and only added new questline and location, you would see people complaining that the UR2 feels like expansion, like the expedition for example.

 

[BlackPlate]

I don't think a change in the core mechanics was necessary. The combat system is already meaty enough to allow him to get creative with the encounters without the game feeling too "more of the same"(which isn't a bad thing per se, mind you).

The "if it ain't broken, don't fix it" proverb is almost never wrong. I hope this is one of the rare exceptions for the sake of the game.

I don't want to deride you or assume too much, but I can imagine why you, as someone who loves jrpgs, would feel it's meaty enough to just need more different flavours of enemies to not feel stale.
You can boil down FPS to just being 'point mouse on enemy and click' but it still feels more engaging and varied than the boiled down version of jrpg combat, selecting attack and then selecting the enemy. It comes from real time 3D combat allowing you to move and shoot anywhere, even if most changes are negligible you feel like you are doing something new. You add grid tiles, which limits movement. You remove manual aiming and make it tab select, which limits aiming. You increase actions taken per turn, which limits reactivity.
I am simplifying, dumbing down and excluding a lot of things, but the point I'm making is that giving more control to the player at all times makes them feel like they can do much more, and that greatly expands how much they want to fight the same enemy.
Smaller turns with more turns being given, if done right, follows this idea. Going from one turn chump into multiple turn chump, even if actions taken are basically the same should feel better, excluding all the other possible benefits like new mechanics that this system allows.

 

[luj1]

Styg was cooking some sort of rtwp system for UR too

It was a realtime game originally Im pretty sure, when it was called project Vertigo

 

[Jrpgfan]

I don't think a change in the core mechanics was necessary. The combat system is already meaty enough to allow him to get creative with the encounters without the game feeling too "more of the same"(which isn't a bad thing per se, mind you).

The "if it ain't broken, don't fix it" proverb is almost never wrong. I hope this is one of the rare exceptions for the sake of the game.

No, i think given vast extensiveness of UR and expansions, the enemy types and their abilities were practically exhausted, and not much new could be brought to the table.

People thought the same about Expeditions. I'm sure Styg can come up with new enemies and new mechanics to keep it fresh. It's a new game with a whole different engine, he can reinvent even old enemies.

With rehashing combat, even similar enemies could bring novelty.

With the risk of ruining the whole combat system.

Now we still dont know about perks, but just changing combat system forces you to redesign all perks even if you intent to keep some from UR1

No reason he shouldn't come up with new perks or even redesign the whole perk system. It would still be a more safe move than going from traditional turn-based to a simultaneous turn roguelike system.

 

[Jrpgfan]

I don't think a change in the core mechanics was necessary. The combat system is already meaty enough to allow him to get creative with the encounters without the game feeling too "more of the same"(which isn't a bad thing per se, mind you).

The "if it ain't broken, don't fix it" proverb is almost never wrong. I hope this is one of the rare exceptions for the sake of the game.

I don't want to deride you or assume too much, but I can imagine why you, as someone who loves jrpgs, would feel it's meaty enough to just need more different flavours of enemies to not feel stale.

I've finished 2/3rds of the RPG Codex Top 101 list, including Jagged Alliance 2 which has a more robust combat system than Underrail(and the sequel most likely, even with this proposed new system).

I have more experience with cRPGs than self proclaimed grognards on this site.

 

[Stavrophore]

I would never expect codex to like it when devs play it safe. You want safe and trusted mechanics? Play grimoire.

 

[Jrpgfan]

I would never expect codex to like it when devs play it safe. You want safe and trusted mechanics? Play grimoire.

If you already have a good system that pleases the Codex, it(usually) means the system is already complex and fun enough.

Doesn't mean you can't change anything - like I said, there's plenty to tinker with the current system - but going too wild with it, you can end up turning the game into something completely different and alienating your playerbase.

I've already played Grimoire btw. Pretty decent Blobber.

 

[Bruno]

Hope combat will not become a staggered affair, to the point if being no fun.
Imagine a fast puncher, dealing out the equivalent of 30 4AP punches per turn in the current system. That seems time-consuming when opponents take action after every single punch.

 

[Nikanuur]

Wow, how much more monocled can this get? A game that lets you land a pommel strike with a two-handed weapon—one that requires less minimum strength than using the weapon's usual business end, at that! I like that.

 

[Stavrophore]

I like that all the codexers who love tranny made games don't frequent underrail topics. Coincidence?

 

[toro]

I might be looking through rose-tinted glasses but I can genuinely see the combat feeling better.

You have some big glasses

Whatever was shown in the alpha video doesn't look better and I doubt it will feel better.

Rogue-like combat is not for everyone and imho it's not an evolution: it's less tactical and even more time consuming than the existing turn base combat.

We agree to disagree.

 

[normie]

they're not evolving the combat, they're going back lmao

 

[Stavrophore]

Im thinking Styg could do better if he had released this game not as Underrail 2: Infusion, but differently named, so not associated with underrail, but still set in underrail universe. Then all the people who expected a contination of systems like turn based combat, wouldn't get so upset...

 

[Ol' Willy]

I am not sure how will the Roguelike combat works with how highly lethal everything in Underrail is.

Getting slowed down/using a slow action in RL most of the times equal getting instagibbed by enemy doing 3 actions at once to you. Made even worse against multiple enemies.

Won't be an issue late game but early game would be awful. I am not sure if it solves the Alpha strike problem too. Like for slow characters now it is even MORE important to Alpha Strike

It will work mostly the same

For glass cannons, you maxx your speed and damage. Start with applying debuffs on the enemies (slow them down and ruin their accuracy) then quickly kill them.

For tanks you will simply minimize the damage

 

[Nikanuur]

I like that all the codexers who love tranny made games don't frequent underrail topics. Coincidence?

I don't know if you meant me, or someone else, or something in general. But either way the combat turns, I like what I saw from that alpha footage very much. I took the longest to get into Underrail, but I've never regretted giving it a second chance, having been provided a lot of help and feedback on the game's features here. And seeing that possibility of two various, nicely substantiated attacks with a two-handed weapon in the newer game made me a believer for the second time.