Requiring hits to gain skill?

[Polluxo]

Should you be required to hit a real target to level up a skill, in magic, archery, and melee. Basically, shooting arrows and mana missiles into the air won't get you anywhere, taking out at least 50% of the macroers and grind. Also increasing skill gain to balance with the required hit.

But still, two friends would just group up and shoot each other, how do you make it less exploitable and more natural? I thought maybe limit it to gaining skill from only enemy hits, but that alienates rogues. So maybe you gain 60% less skill gain from hitting someone considered friendly, giving more incentive to kill enemies, except that still isn't entirely natural.

How about this, it's a bit more complex but I believe it would fix most of the previous problems and still be natural.

While keeping with the first idea...

Diminishing returns on skill gain per individual.
In other words, the more you hit the same person, the less skill you will gain off of them. Say you and your buddy decide to shoot back and fourth at each other, after a fair period of time, you're getting less and less skill from them until nothing.

It makes sense, right? The more you fight the same person continuously, the more you understand how they tick, and you learn less. Unless they're more skilled than you, like a Sensei, but that would be too difficult to add since there's no overall level.

Then after another period of time you are able to gain skill from them again, think of it like harvesting instanced nodes. I think it would be fair to only apply this to other players since you can't quite exploit it on a mob.

[Polluxo]

Bump.

[OvanOf Twilight]

No, because why should it differ who I hit to gain skills? If I hit Joe, the Blue Human, I learn how to hit someone like that. If I hit Bob, the Red Human, I still learn the same thing.
Also casting is only concerned about whether you succeed at casting, not whether it hits anything. Melee doesn't have you fail to swing like spells can fizzle out.
Archery, I don't know much on, so no comment.

[Haeso]

My 90 archery thinks I should gain melee skill from hitting nothing too.

[Polluxo]

No, because why should it differ who I hit to gain skills? If I hit Joe, the Blue Human, I learn how to hit someone like that. If I hit Bob, the Red Human, I still learn the same thing.
Also casting is only concerned about whether you succeed at casting, not whether it hits anything. Melee doesn't have you fail to swing like spells can fizzle out.
Archery, I don't know much on, so no comment.

I never concluded it should matter who you hit to gain skill. Also you succeed at casting 100% anyways, so wtf? Unless there are high level spells that fail sometimes, either way that wouldn't dis persuade me.

[DwellerBelow]

My 90 archery thinks I should gain melee skill from hitting nothing too.

This, my archery is doing ok, but my melee sux, I can't level sword just by pressing a button.

If magic and archery required hits to level, the system would be so much more balanced.

[Polluxo]

This, my archery is doing ok, but my melee sux, I can't level sword just by pressing a button.

If magic and archery required hits to level, the system would be so much more balanced.

That's what I am trying to point out here. I understand you have a choice whether you want to macro the air or shoot at targets. But in even the slightest sense realism, which do you think would rank you the most skill? Also making it less of an exploitable grind with or without macro, and making it more fun to level skills is my purpose here.

Like I said, to balance the need to hit a target I say to increase skill gain in balance.

[Signus]

I had thought of suggesting this during beta, or maybe making it so that skill gains against players and NPCs are a bit higher. You can shoot a tree if you want, but actually using spells in combat is faster sort of thing. Imagine all the QQ though.

[retrospect]

If i cast the spell and it burns the reagents it should count for betters. The same with archery and arrows. Swinging a sword mid air does not take any durability.

Use this as an example. Get a bow irl and shoot at random targets. It does not matter what you shoot at just as long as you aim at something. You will get better at hitting your target.

Now go get a club and swing it at the air or a tree for a while. You might get better at swinging it but not so much at fighting with it.

It works well for in game as well. Every time you fire anything off (other then MM, HS, and Launch) it cost you money. Swings cost you a bit of durability only if you hit.

Lets say you get 1k hits out of a 300g weapon. 1k casts of rend cost you 3k gold (from players at 3g a pop if they will sell) and the 300g staff that is taking durability loss. With the amount of work and gold magic training cost already requiring a hit for betters when a miss still cost you gold it driving the price though the roof and that is just for 1 spell of one school. Just leave it alone.

[Polluxo]

If i cast the spell and it burns the reagents it should count for betters. The same with archery and arrows. Swinging a sword mid air does not take any durability.

Use this as an example. Get a bow irl and shoot at random targets. It does not matter what you shoot at just as long as you aim at something. You will get better at hitting your target.

Now go get a club and swing it at the air or a tree for a while. You might get better at swinging it but not so much at fighting with it.

I wouldn't mind a little bit of skill gain for not hitting anything, but not as high as it currently is, but for hitting targets you should gain at least 25% or 50% more skill than you currently do to balance it out. Even though you might gain some skill for hitting nothing with a bow, you will learn more from actually hitting a live target.

[retrospect]

I wouldn't mind a little bit of skill gain for not hitting anything, but not as high as it currently is, but for hitting targets you should gain at least 25% or 50% more skill than you currently do to balance it out. Even though you might gain some skill for hitting nothing with a bow, you will learn more from actually hitting a live target.

Not true about the live target. It's the same with guns and i have alot of experience with guns. There is no difference real between hitting a target and a live person. It hits or it misses. Leading a target does not require much if you can already hit that same target standing still with the weapon. Only in the movies do people miss that much because someone is running. You might think you are fast but compared to a projectile weapon you might as well be standing still. I got to say it is harder to hit a moving target in a video game then in real life.

[Polluxo]

Not true about the live target. It's the same with guns and i have alot of experience with guns. There is no difference real between hitting a target and a live person. It hits or it misses. Leading a target does not require much if you can already hit that same target standing still with the weapon. Only in the movies do people miss that much because someone is running. You might think you are fast but compared to a projectile weapon you might as well be standing still. I got to say it is harder to hit a moving target in a video game then in real life.

If you're saying that shooting a gun is on the same level of skill as swordsmanship, or archery then I disagree. Anyway, you're bringing this too much into realism and out of practicality, but I like to balance both. What I meant is since there aren't any lifeless targets moving or otherwise to gain skill from, shooting the air or water should be less beneficial than shooting a live target.

[retrospect]

If you're saying that shooting a gun is on the same level of skill as swordsmanship, or archery then I disagree. Anyway, you're bringing this too much into realism and out of practicality, but I like to balance both. What I meant is since there aren't any lifeless targets moving or otherwise to gain skill from, shooting the air or water is less beneficial.

I'm saying that with magic the act of casting the spell it self makes you better at casting it. What you hit or do not hit is a matter of aim not spell power. Leveling a spell does not affect aim only power. I do not learn any more or less about casting magic if it hits you or you side step it. I have still burned reagents and successfully casted the spell.

If you swing a melee weapon in mid air it cost you nothing in game. Take a look at the already extreme cost and time of just getting to a elemental magic school. Understand that just getting to elemental magic is the cheap and easy part. Leveling it up to a mastered level is going to be serious work. If magic required a hit misses would still cost and drive the price of leveling magic up what another 20%? ( I'm giving you a 80% or so hit rate)

[Rodhull]

Personally i always thought a good system (for melee) would be you gain a decent amount of skill from hitting enemies who's highest weapon skill is equal or higher than your own.
If you attack enemies whos skills are lower than your own then you get some nominal amount so as not to totally invalidate it.

Of course Mobs would need to be given effective melee levels for the system to 'rank them' but personally i think that would be great.

After all what would a master swordsman really learn butchering a gang of drunken bums...

[Polluxo]

I'm saying that with magic the act of casting the spell it self makes you better at casting it. What you hit or do not hit is a matter of aim not spell power. Leveling a spell does not affect aim only power. I do not learn any more or less about casting magic if it hits you or you side step it. I have still burned reagents and successfully casted the spell.

As I pointed out in previous post, my overall goal of this would be making it less of an exploitable grind with or without macro, and making it slightly fun to level skills such as magic. And I re-thought what I said in my OP, I don't think you should get 0 skill from hitting nothing, but less than how much you get now.

As an example, if the current system awards you .5, then shooting nothing would award .25, and hitting target would award .9.

[retrospect]

Really your idea is not near a bad as the OP but i would rather it say a constant rate of gain as it is. AFK macroing is against the rules but if they want to sit there a do it by hand let them. You see alot of it with MM but MM is a free spell. You see alot of it with rend but rend blows ass and should never be used in a fight. If someone wants to blow 20k of reagents (that would not even max 1 spell btw) into a wall once they have elemental magic that is their waste.

[Haeso]

If i cast the spell and it burns the reagents it should count for betters. The same with archery and arrows. Swinging a sword mid air does not take any durability.


lolwut?

[retrospect]

lolwut?

What it does? I never noticed a durability loss unless i hit something. Didn't really look into it though. Not that it matters much as archery and magic still have a reagent cost on top of also having a weapon cost.

[Haeso]

What it does? I never noticed a durability loss unless i hit something. Didn't really look into it though. Not that it matters much as archery and magic still have a reagent cost on top of also having a weapon cost.

Not saying it's the same cost, just saying you're wrong with a bemused tone. Grab a fresh weapon and swing a few times at nothing.

[retrospect]

Not saying it's the same cost, just saying you're wrong with a bemused tone. Grab a fresh weapon and swing a few times at nothing.

I'll take your word for it. At work atm so not like i could check anyway.

[Miira]

I think a good solution is to have hits count for full skill gain points and misses only give half. Realistically, even if you fail, you learn something. However, giving full point for shooting randomly into the sky encourages macroing.

[Ghilteras]

bow/spell should gain skills only on hits ASAP

[McLaren08]

Should you be required to hit a real target to level up a skill, in magic, archery, and melee. Basically, shooting arrows and mana missiles into the air won't get you anywhere, taking out at least 50% of the macroers and grind. Also increasing skill gain to balance with the required hit.

But still, two friends would just group up and shoot each other, how do you make it less exploitable and more natural? I thought maybe limit it to gaining skill from only enemy hits, but that alienates rogues. So maybe you gain 60% less skill gain from hitting someone considered friendly, giving more incentive to kill enemies, except that still isn't entirely natural.

How about this, it's a bit more complex but I believe it would fix most of the previous problems and still be natural.

While keeping with the first idea...

Diminishing returns on skill gain per individual.
In other words, the more you hit the same person, the less skill you will gain off of them. Say you and your buddy decide to shoot back and fourth at each other, after a fair period of time, you're getting less and less skill from them until nothing.

It makes sense, right? The more you fight the same person continuously, the more you understand how they tick, and you learn less. Unless they're more skilled than you, like a Sensei, but that would be too difficult to add since there's no overall level.

Then after another period of time you are able to gain skill from them again, think of it like harvesting instanced nodes. I think it would be fair to only apply this to other players since you can't quite exploit it on a mob.

People shadow box and learn. Thus people should be able to castje and learnje

[losinglife]

agree on the hits for skill gains ( do you currently gain skill for melee just swining? i havnt tested that)

dont agree on that gay shit of diminishing returns for hitting the same person.

[Blackguard]

Absolutely. You should be required to hit a target to gain skill, and skills should be faster to advance across the board.

[Polluxo]

I think a good solution is to have hits count for full skill gain points and misses only give half. Realistically, even if you fail, you learn something. However, giving full point for shooting randomly into the sky encourages macroing.

I would be fine with this too.