Salem

So, at this point Bears, and Spiders have "combo" abilities that can cause additional damage to players via trapping them and causing reel, and then exploiting that. In that light, other animals should maybe have some additional mechanics/abilities that are similar. Say, with Deer, when they charge you, it would basically be like a Bullrun, and stun you if they hit you. Besides that, they might also have a "reer" attack in which they use their front hooves to hit you, and this would do more damage if you were stunned/reeling from the charge. This would reward avoiding the charge.

March Hares might also have more moves, including a "leap at" like attack, (Reminiscent of the Killer Rabbit, logical for a rabbit, also makes them more dangerous because they would be able to unpredictably close distance on you very quickly.) They might also have a "kick" type attack similar to leg sweep that would work about the same (Making it harder to escape from them, and generally kite them as you can now.) It would make sense since rabbits are big on kicking things when they defend themselves. (You could also have the "Kick" be like an uppercut, or give them another kick variant that was like that, besides the "Sweep" style one.)

Personally I find the whole MORTAL KOMBAT with animals to be a lame game mechanic and we should be trying to break out of it not dive deeper.

It reminds me of every other MMO out their in which you walk 5 feet and kill a mob and collect some dropped gold, while loot/reward system (butchering, cooking, tanning etc) is original but the act of hunting itself is very conventional. Basically the combat system intended for PvP is being recycled to produce some PvE fights which in no way resemble hunting wild game. Some kind of stealth/stalking system and an environment with less then petting zoo density is what I'd find interesting and original.

ImpalerWrG wrote:Personally I find the whole MORTAL KOMBAT with animals to be a lame game mechanic and we should be trying to break out of it not dive deeper.

The original idea for hunting was that animals could kill players. Pdox didn't agree with this wonderful idea. I hope they go back to this.

Dallane wrote:

ImpalerWrG wrote:Personally I find the whole MORTAL KOMBAT with animals to be a lame game mechanic and we should be trying to break out of it not dive deeper.

The original idea for hunting was that animals could kill players. Pdox didn't agree with this wonderful idea. I hope they go back to this.

I support killer MONSTER, and if you had intense KOMBAT with them that's fine, the player is going up against elite content in elite areas for elite rewards. Combat establishes that your using an elite character and you should be putting that character at risk to get elite rewards.

It's the idea of using PvP mechanics for regular everyday hunting for food/hides etc that I find silly because animals even up the the size of deer rarely if ever turn and attack, and the random 'March Hare' type mechanic (which looks to be getting added to other animals given that white deer tease) is perfectly adequate to reflect that and give some danger/thrill to hunting even if they only KO rather then kill. Regular animals don't need combat to act as a 'you must be this tall' humor test to access them, theirs already a whole set of proficiency based skills that open the animals to hunting.

ImpalerWrG wrote:

Dallane wrote:

ImpalerWrG wrote:Personally I find the whole MORTAL KOMBAT with animals to be a lame game mechanic and we should be trying to break out of it not dive deeper.

The original idea for hunting was that animals could kill players. Pdox didn't agree with this wonderful idea. I hope they go back to this.

I support killer MONSTER, and if you had intense KOMBAT with them that's fine, the player is going up against elite content in elite areas for elite rewards. Combat establishes that your using an elite character and you should be putting that character at risk to get elite rewards.

It's the idea of using PvP mechanics for regular everyday hunting for food/hides etc that I find silly because animals even up the the size of deer rarely if ever turn and attack, and the random 'March Hare' type mechanic (which looks to be getting added to other animals given that white deer tease) is perfectly adequate to reflect that and give some danger/thrill to hunting even if they only KO rather then kill. Regular animals don't need combat to act as a 'you must be this tall' humor test to access them, theirs already a whole set of proficiency based skills that open the animals to hunting.

>the casual thinks animals shouldn't be able to kill
>top lel

But really that was the old devs wanting that. I think bears, snakes and alt animals should be the ones able to kill.

Personally I think its better if only players can kill, the most deadly game play for keeps.

Perhaps it could be a matter of beasts rolling their mood/hunger levels when being generated. An angry bear will viciously maul you just cause you dared piss it off further. A calm one might wander off after mauling you.

Similarly a hungry beast will eat you, fatality via omnomnomz.

Snakes could kill but only if you absolutely fail to take serum, and only in some rarer species. Perhaps they'd need more hits of serum to take the debuff off too.

As for the other stuff, I'm sure we could find some nice mechanics as to how they might be able to kill. Since the game seems to be encouraging alts (as I will most definetly not be hunting on a crafter main if animals can kill), I figure losing a hunting alt wouldn't be too harsh with the speed at which you can recover nowadays. Would obviously need to reconsider at what biles people could hunt various animals, so as to benefit from their unique variable food buffs. For example a new player wouldn't be able to eat blood game meals simply because he'd never risk death until at way higher biles and gear.

I'm curious if anyone else feels that the bears fear debuff is a little too strong?

An angry bear wandered into my poor camp, (a facet of the game I love btw) so I do the natural thing and run like hell. I swim across a nearby river and manage to escape the bear and carry on running a few screens away to make sure. The combat icon changed to a "?" then disappeared, so I stopped and took stock. My 26 BB was at about half, so I ate the food I had on hand which should of topped it up. But it kept dropping, so I ate more. Kept dropping, I finished off my scraps which weren't much good for BB regen, and started to forage for extra food. In the end I got KO'ed at least a minute after escaping the bear.

So I've put it down to a learning experience, and will carry more/better regen food at all times.

But I still wonder if the fear isn't a little bit too much.

Sidenote: What does the little bar on the fear debuff icon mean? It seemed to be going down, so I'm guessing its a duration? There didn't seem to be any tooltip when I hovered my mouse over it.

sogdog wrote:I'm curious if anyone else feels that the bears fear debuff is a little too strong?

An angry bear wandered into my poor camp, (a facet of the game I love btw) so I do the natural thing and run like hell. I swim across a nearby river and manage to escape the bear and carry on running a few screens away to make sure. The combat icon changed to a "?" then disappeared, so I stopped and took stock. My 26 BB was at about half, so I ate the food I had on hand which should of topped it up. But it kept dropping, so I ate more. Kept dropping, I finished off my scraps which weren't much good for BB regen, and started to forage for extra food. In the end I got KO'ed at least a minute after escaping the bear.

So I've put it down to a learning experience, and will carry more/better regen food at all times.

But I still wonder if the fear isn't a little bit too much.

Sidenote: What does the little bar on the fear debuff icon mean? It seemed to be going down, so I'm guessing its a duration? There didn't seem to be any tooltip when I hovered my mouse over it.

It actually seems a little weak, besides it can be avoided by not agroing bears.
Yes the bar is the duration.

I wasn't overly clear in what I was trying to say.

I meant that the duration of the fear seemed a bit long.

Anyway, I said my piece. Moving on.

(Thanks for the confirmation on the icon bar)