Melee while casting?

[Greatguardian]

I don't need to respond to points which only tangentially address the issue at hand.

If you have limited/non-existant understanding of or experience with large-scale combat engines, it's plenty easy to look at something that sounds remotely feasible or within the realm of possibility and assume that it is even if it's not.

I refuse to pull the rl card on forums like these, but I will simply tell you right now that there is a huge gap between what is feasible in theory and what is practically applicable within the confines of the existing code base in practice. It's not a matter of how much work it would take. It's a matter of "Well, maybe if we make a new game we could add it into that".

I unblocked lolCapricious to look at what he spewed all over this thread, and honestly I'm not sure it was worth the time. The player is not reacting to anything. Defensive skills are not a player action. Combat in ffxi flows something like this:

Actor 1 (Monster) launches attack at Object (Player) >
Actor 1's stats are compared to Object's stats as each combat check is performed (hit, pDif, crit, counter, etc) >
Actor 1's results are tallied and the appropriate appropriate changes to relevant Object stats are performed >
The appropriate animations are displayed on the client

Player 1 begins casting spell on Object (Monster) >
Server waits X amount of time >
If Player Coordinate =/= Original Player Coordinate and/or Player fails Interrupt check, Fail cast /break >
Else, run Player 1 stats against Object stats as each Combat Magic check is performed (D, resist, mdb, etc) >
Player 1's results are tallied and appropriate changes to Object stats are performed >
The appropriate animations are displayed on the client

Does it matter if both of these actions happen at the same time? No. Why? Because each action is specific to the Actor/Object performing it.

A player is not guarding against a monster when they counter their attack. A monster simply failed an offensive check. This is a very important distinction to make.

You cannot attack while casting. This will never happen. I don't give a damn if you think I'm screwing your creative process doggy style. That's just the way the cookie crumbles.

If you really want to herp while you're derping, ask for an ability/spell that stores Spontaneity charges based on the amount of damage you give/receive over a period of time while a 3Dur/5Rec JA or 3Dur/10Rec Spell is active. That's actually possible and almost does what you want to do.

[CapriciousOne]

I generally have you blocked and a whole of others but I occasionly view it anyway to entertain myself so the feeling is mutual. None the less you cant deny that there is a clear hierarchy of events between job traits and skills like shield, guard, evasion. The player is "reacting" so to speak based on those same checks you mentioned. I say the player reacts because of the simple fact that there is animation for it when it occurs. Shield activates the player animation raises the shield in blocking motion etc for example. In coding speak after the checks are done the function calls are clearly returning a value to another procedure that determines whether to run the animation for blocking with a shield, parrying, or complete evading the attack or do nothing at all and allow the attack uncontested.

Though even still with all that noted I dont see this as a reality giving the insistence of keeping with old visions and many of the points made later in the thread like many of the original programmers of SE proprietary engine either being fired, retired, or even dead. It is often difficult to come in on somebody elses baby and pick up where they left of or improve upon what they have established without a good consultation with those involved without some serious implications.

In any case I dont see this happening for the simple reason that in most games magic is seen as a function of high intelligence and as such requiring total concentration. In addition cast usually utilizes the hands in the effort to help concentrate the power of the spell being cast and as such would reduce the concentration level of the spell as well as the damage done once it is cast. Now that in itself may be a solution in implementing this feature and allowing spells cast to suffer a damage penalty when trying to physically attack while it is being cast. It wont be popular but it would logically make sense and be "realistic" so to speak.

[saevel]

I generally have you blocked and a whole of others but I occasionly view it anyway to entertain myself so the feeling is mutual. None the less you cant deny that there is a clear hierarchy of events between job traits and skills like shield, guard, evasion. The player is "reacting" so to speak based on those same checks you mentioned. I say the player reacts because of the simple fact that there is animation for it when it occurs. Shield activates the player animation raises the shield in blocking motion etc for example. In coding speak after the checks are done the function calls are clearly returning a value to another procedure that determines whether to run the animation for blocking with a shield, parrying, or complete evading the attack or do nothing at all and allow the attack uncontested.

Though even still with all that noted I dont see this as a reality giving the insistence of keeping with old visions and many of the points made later in the thread like many of the original programmers of SE proprietary engine either being fired, retired, or even dead. It is often difficult to come in on somebody elses baby and pick up where they left of or improve upon what they have established without a good consultation with those involved without some serious implications.

In any case I dont see this happening for the simple reason that in most games magic is seen as a function of high intelligence and as such requiring total concentration. In addition cast usually utilizes the hands in the effort to help concentrate the power of the spell being cast and as such would reduce the concentration level of the spell as well as the damage done once it is cast. Now that in itself may be a solution in implementing this feature and allowing spells cast to suffer a damage penalty when trying to physically attack while it is being cast. It wont be popular but it would logically make sense and be "realistic" so to speak.

I've gone over this a few times, you don't block anything. There is no checks done on the client side about blocking or reacting. The block is part of the monsters attack round and doesn't involve any actions on the players part.

Monster Attack Event -> Do calculations (damage / hit / block) -> determine block has happened and perform calculations accordingly.
Send client packet saying block has happened -> Client shows block animation.

Absolutely nothing you did effected that block nor it's animation.

What people are asking for is the ability for the client to initiate two simultaneous actions and have both actions resolve independently without effecting each other. This is not impossible, not even hard, but it requires the server's event engine be programmed to handle it. This is a VERY big change in server code. I'm not talking action scripts which are the things that handle all the calculations and event resolutions, I'm talking the actual management code behind everything. That can cause catastrophic unpredictable effects. Nothing that lots of debugging and testing can't fix, but still manpower intensive. I would expect them to recode the entire client to DX9/10 before I'd expect them to recode the server.

[CapriciousOne]

I've gone over this a few times, you don't block anything. There is no checks done on the client side about blocking or reacting. The block is part of the monsters attack round and doesn't involve any actions on the players part.

Monster Attack Event -> Do calculations (damage / hit / block) -> determine block has happened and perform calculations accordingly.
Send client packet saying block has happened -> Client shows block animation.

Absolutely nothing you did effected that block nor it's animation.

What people are asking for is the ability for the client to initiate two simultaneous actions and have both actions resolve independently without effecting each other. This is not impossible, not even hard, but it requires the server's event engine be programmed to handle it. This is a VERY big change in server code. I'm not talking action scripts which are the things that handle all the calculations and event resolutions, I'm talking the actual management code behind everything. That can cause catastrophic unpredictable effects. Nothing that lots of debugging and testing can't fix, but still manpower intensive. I would expect them to recode the entire client to DX9/10 before I'd expect them to recode the server.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. With the logic being used, then one could arguably say that when a monster evades or block our attacks they aren't doing anything either. The way I am looking at this I suppose is that whatever defensive moves are taken, (guard, parry, shield block, evasion) is a direct result of a failed check between you and the mob regardless of what side of the transaction (server or client) initiated the action in question.

I will agree that the process management code on the server would need to be chagned not just for our job but other jobs as well for this to work. It also would be a very time consuming task as well I imagine. The only thing I have to say in reference to these facts is that if the development team didnt waste so much time on these bs and practically useless stuff they have been giving us and other jobs they would've found the time better served improving the heart and soul of the game... the engine than these ridiculously broken crap. PRIORITIES SE PRIORITIES !!! lol

[Meyi]

I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

How can you disagree with the truth?

-facepalm-

[CapriciousOne]

How can you disagree with the truth?

-facepalm-

the only one who knows the truth is SE PERIOD. Everybody likes to think their view of a topic is the truth but that doesnt make it so necesarily. I include myself in that statement as well but we all see things how we want but whatever. Unless you yourself are part of the development team, anything anybody says is nothing but speculation without confirmation from them.

[saevel]

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. With the logic being used, then one could arguably say that when a monster evades or block our attacks they aren't doing anything either. The way I am looking at this I suppose is that whatever defensive moves are taken, (guard, parry, shield block, evasion) is a direct result of a failed check between you and the mob regardless of what side of the transaction (server or client) initiated the action in question.

I will agree that the process management code on the server would need to be chagned not just for our job but other jobs as well for this to work. It also would be a very time consuming task as well I imagine. The only thing I have to say in reference to these facts is that if the development team didnt waste so much time on these bs and practically useless stuff they have been giving us and other jobs they would've found the time better served improving the heart and soul of the game... the engine than these ridiculously broken crap. PRIORITIES SE PRIORITIES !!! lol

Now your being daft on purpose. The server has NO animations so get that out of your head. It's just a huge database with an event processor that's constantly checking for event actions. Your attack round is what will proc a monster evade / guard, so yes the monster didn't do anything at all, the player was the actor that initiated the action.

ACTORS DO NOT DO DEFENSIVE MOVES THEY ARE JUST RESULTS TO ANOTHER ACTORS ACTIONS

There can't say it any cleared then that.