House destruction: keep as is, or limit weapons?

[psychobilly]

Quick poll to see what people think about house destruction. Right now you can destroy a house with any weapon. It seems pretty silly to me to slash a house down with a worn short sword, shoot it with arrows, or spear it to death. It seems to me a better idea would be to limit house destruction to sledgehammers for individuals, and later on to siege weapons when implemented.

1. Leave house destruction as is
2. Limit house destruction to particular weapons (i.e. sledgehammers and siege weapons).
3. Some other idea.

[Morfildor]

Make it sledgehammers, right now I think its retarded that you can punch a house down, let alone slash it down with a sword.

[Spadar]

Yeah heavy blunt weapons would probably make more sense than beating down houses with your fists.

[metavision]

I would think that craftable ONLY tool would be allowed for such an endeavor. Not only that, but highly customizable tools that are meant for such incredible blows.

Massive hammer (ie: sledgehammer), with extremely hard hammer-head and great durability. They should be expense to build, so that the risk vs reward, and time invested weighs heavily upon an organization if they wish to raise/destroy someone's house.

It should not be a trivial affair, but a organized and costly endeavor.

[Lerdoc]

Originally Posted by Morfildor

Make it sledgehammers, right now I think its retarded that you can punch a house down, let alone slash it down with a sword.

^This and finally that piece of crap would find a use and house destruction would require additional supplies.

But didn't they say you will not be able to destroy a house with normal handheld weapons when we will have siege weapons?\

And lulz at poll results, first time I see everyone agreeing on one thing.

[RedGekko]

Destroying a well-built structure should be a massive and difficult exercise, otherwise there will be little point in building one.

Building a house in MO is probably the biggest effort any player can make at present (and for the foreseeable future). Who would be happy to see all that effort vanish overnight ?

[Predator]

Defnititely Sledgehammers only. Makes it more realistic and gives them damn things a purpose.

[Mauzi]

I would say that axes could work aswell. Maybe fire arrows too. I would still like to see some very tiny damage done to a house with all other weapons, there needs to be a huge durability loss though and fist hits need to damage the attacker.

Though, I recently tried to destroy a house with 1hp and it didn't work at all - I wonder if this is implemented even. Did anyone actually try it or is this just a generic thread about the topic in general ?

Also, everyone note that for later there'll be slow and hard to move siege weapons to more efficiently destroy buildings. In my view that'll be the latest time when regular weapons will lose most of their ability to destroy buildings.

[Electrum]

I disagree. It is unrealistic to do NOTHING to a house with any weapon, from a sword to an arrow. What would be a better solution is to limit the damage of most weapons severely. For instance, arrows would do 1-3 damage, spears 3-5, and swords 3-7. The catch being, using swords or spears on a house would do EXTREME damage to the weapon, just as trying to cut wood with your great blade would in real life.

Blunt weapons would do a reasonable amount of damage, depending on the head type. They would only take reasonable durability and perhaps do 10-30 damage.

Remember, this game is a sandbox. You shouldn't be physically limited on what you want to do. If I want to hit a house with a short sword and bring it down, I could. I would just be an idiot.

[Henrik Nystrom]

Guys, its suposed to be that only enough damage and right type of damage is actually doing damage on structures, as in option 2 is pretty much what it is today.
If you find other data not following option 2 then please submit that feedback so we can balance it. Cause option 2 is what it is or suposed to be at the moment.

[Gravvis]

Originally Posted by Henrik Nystrom

Guys, its suposed to be that only enough damage and right type of damage is actually doing damage on structures, as in option 2 is pretty much what it is today.
If you find other data not following option 2 then please submit that feedback so we can balance it. Cause option 2 is what it is or suposed to be at the moment.

This is not the case. The typical house attacks use newbie swords in bulk...or cheap throw away spear type weapons...

I support option #2

[psychobilly]

Originally Posted by Henrik Nystrom

Guys, its suposed to be that only enough damage and right type of damage is actually doing damage on structures, as in option 2 is pretty much what it is today.
If you find other data not following option 2 then please submit that feedback so we can balance it. Cause option 2 is what it is or suposed to be at the moment.

A rebalance is needed. Piercing damage and low-end slashing/bludgeoning damage could use a nerf (that's really what the poll is about).

I'm also suggesting a buff to sledgehammers to make them an 'optimal' weapon for house destruction. They have no use in game right now, and it would create an economy for siege weapons (what is the most efficient sledgehammer?).

[Turkis]

Rise of the cuprum sledges?

[nuikka]

Originally Posted by Henrik Nystrom

Guys, its suposed to be that only enough damage and right type of damage is actually doing damage on structures, as in option 2 is pretty much what it is today.
If you find other data not following option 2 then please submit that feedback so we can balance it. Cause option 2 is what it is or suposed to be at the moment.

the fact that you can use starter swords or even fists to knock a house down is just plain wrong.

[Mauzi]

Originally Posted by nuikka

the fact that you can use starter swords or even fists to knock a house down is just plain wrong.

Sure is, sadly it didn't work for me. Maybe the building was special protected and undestructable, but the one hitpoint of the newly placed building never went away even after 30mins hitting with two people. Or it is working as intended now, just as Henrik wrote.

Did anyone try it after release or is all this just based on the beta where it worked to destroy houses with fists ?

[Katana622]

You can do damage with arrows, swords, and worst of all fists. I think sledgehammers should be the only weapons that do damage, the rest should break SUPER fast and do very little damage.

[Henrik Nystrom]

Alright guys, we got that confirmed and going to change it, it's all about opt 2
Thanks for feedback!


There was a bug actually, so next patch it should work as opt 2.

[Leukos]

sledgehammer's are fine, but everytime i have to destroy a house in real life i go straight for the axe.

[TehRalph]

Originally Posted by Leukos

sledgehammer's are fine, but everytime i have to destroy a house in real life i go straight for the axe.

Well modern day houses are mostly made of wood, and a sledgehammer does work better than an axe even on modern houses. So axes really shouldnt do as much.

[Electrum]

Originally Posted by Henrik Nystrom

Alright guys, we got that confirmed and going to change it, it's all about opt 2
Thanks for feedback!


There was a bug actually, so next patch it should work as opt 2.

Please read my above post. Decisions like this pull the sand out of your box, at least, in my opinion.

[Mycke]

Originally Posted by Electrum

Please read my above post. Decisions like this pull the sand out of your box.

I don't agree...

Your logic is like saying I should be able to make a sword that actaully cuts out of leather or wool.

I can make a sword out of wool but it won't cut anything.

You can hit a house with your dagger, but it wont hurt anything...

[TehRalph]

Originally Posted by Electrum

Please read my above post. Decisions like this pull the sand out of your box.

Wait for the change before criticizing the decisions of the team. We dont know yet that swords and spears will do 0 damage, all we know is that sledgehammers will be more optimal.

[Electrum]

Originally Posted by Mycke

I don't agree...

Your logic is like saying I should be able to make a sword that actaully cuts out of leather or wool.

I can make a sword out of wool but it won't cut anything.

You can hit a house with your dagger, but it wont hurt anything...

Pull out a kitchen knife and start stabbing at a support in your house. It will do damage, but not much. Stab it millions of times, you might actually make the house unstable, at least in that area.

Houses have a huge amount of HP in the game which allows a small amount of damage from abnormal destruction weapons. As I explained above, this is realistic.

By the way, my logic is like saying I should be able to make a sword out of leather or wool, it just won't do anything and will fall apart.

[psychobilly]

Originally Posted by Electrum

Please read my above post. Decisions like this pull the sand out of your box.

Decisions like this will add sand to the box by creating an economy for weapons that are effective house killers, instead of people buying bulk shortswords at a utility vendor.

[Illuminus1985]

What I like to do is just take a few liters of gasoline and spread it all over the house before lighting a time delayed igniter...wait...

[Mycke]

Originally Posted by Electrum

Pull out a kitchen knife and start stabbing everything in your house. It will do damage, but not much.

Houses have a huge amount of HP in the game which allows a small amount of damage from abnormal destruction weapons.

By the way, my logic is like saying I should be able to make a sword out of leather or wool, it just won't do anything and will fall apart.

A modern home is made out of cardboard and pine cut down to 2/3 of what size they say they are...

The houses in this game are made from stone metal and wood.

Try your kitchen knife on the plaster and 6x6s of a pre 1930's home...

[Katana622]

Originally Posted by Electrum

Please read my above post. Decisions like this pull the sand out of your box.

Make all weapons besides sledge hammers do 1 dmg then, brawling should do 0. An arrow would never hurt a house, neither would a spear. This also doesnt take the sound of of the box. If you think about it, it may actually increase it. Mace crafters were pretty rare, now they may be able to sell things to guilds and whatnot.

[Izzban]

Here is my take on using a dagger, sword, spear, etc to damage a house.

I am not stupid, my character may be, but if I wanted to damage a house using a spear, I wouldn't stand at the middle of the wall and stab...stab..stab...I would look for weak points, or connections I could sever. How about the roof? Looks like a good place to start making holes.

Dagger can be used to work stones out of place, chip away loose mortar, cut away at joints. Lots of work for a dagger if you want to destroy a house (modern or archaic) you just have to use your brain instead of thinking about stab...stab...stab...stab....

I am not, actually, overjoyed to think any weapon can damage my house. But I do build things (buildings) for a living and I can see how simple tools could damage or destroy a structure. It is surprisingly easy to critically damage a modern house with a claw hammer and chisel. (even from the outside)

[zpullin]

Originally Posted by Katana622

Make all weapons besides sledge hammers do 1 dmg then, brawling should do 0. An arrow would never hurt a house, neither would a spear. This also doesnt take the sound of of the box. If you think about it, it may actually increase it. Mace crafters were pretty rare, now they may be able to sell things to guilds and whatnot.

If it is not raining, torches should do 1,000,000,000 damage to a house instantly.

[sCouraGe]

Option #2 for sure.

I can see your point electrum, but there is a difference between sieging and damaging. Yeah you could damage a house with a sword IRL, but the chances of that damage doing anything remotely related to siege damage is low.

[Zealot]

Originally Posted by Mycke

A modern home is made out of cardboard and pine cut down to 2/3 of what size they say they are...

The houses in this game are made from stone metal and wood.

Try your kitchen knife on the plaster and 6x6s of a pre 1930's home...

I can stab a piece of concrete with a butcher knife and do some damage, but the knife would break after a few hits. He is right, taking away the ability to do it completely is anti sandbox, but making it destroy your weapon and take little damage from your weapon isn't.

[Electrum]

Originally Posted by sCouraGe

Option #2 for sure.

I can see your point electrum, but there is a difference between sieging and damaging. Yeah you could damage a house with a sword IRL, but the chances of that damage doing anything remotely related to siege damage is low.

That is exactly what I am saying. I am not suggesting short swords, spears, or arrows, should do any reasonable damage. It should be realistic. That said, the game shouldn't limit you by stopping players from attacking houses with swords.

Originally Posted by psychobilly

Decisions like this will add sand to the box by creating an economy for weapons that are effective house killers, instead of people buying bulk shortswords at a utility vendor.

You misunderstand. The difference between 1 damage and 30 is massive. People will still want to, and need to, buy weapons that are effective. Especially since I also suggested massive durability losses.

300 short swords might barely compare to a single sledgehammer, not to mention, it would take 30 times as long to take a house down.

[Mycke]

Originally Posted by Zealot

I can stab a piece of concrete with a butcher knife and do some damage, but the knife would break after a few hits. He is right, taking away the ability to do it completely is anti sandbox, but making it destroy your weapon and take little damage from your weapon isn't.

Okay fair enough...

If each stab did 1 point of damage and took away 1-2 points of dura I can see that being realistic.

Why you care that you can wear down weapons barely hurting a house, I don't know, but I guess I can't argue if thats what you want...

[Zealot]

Originally Posted by Mycke

Okay fair enough...

If each stab did 1 point of damage and took away 1-2 points of dura I can see that being realistic.

Why you care that you can wear down weapons barely hurting a house, I don't know, but I guess I can't argue if thats what you want...

I can understand your thoughts, but it is just for the sake of sandbox.

[Katana622]

Originally Posted by Mycke

Okay fair enough...

If each stab did 1 point of damage and took away 1-2 points of dura I can see that being realistic.

Why you care that you can wear down weapons barely hurting a house, I don't know, but I guess I can't argue if thats what you want...

Yea this was my thinking as well. If you really must have it so you can do dmg to a house with a wooden dagger or something, make it so they break super super fast and do little to no dmg.

Originally Posted by zpullin

If it is not raining, torches should do 1,000,000,000 damage to a house instantly.

I can't tell what you are trying to get out of this statement so i'll just post this gif of a banana guy:

[sCouraGe]

Originally Posted by Electrum

That is exactly what I am saying. I am not suggesting short swords, spears, or arrows, should do any reasonable damage. It should be realistic. That said, the game shouldn't limit you by stopping players from attacking houses with swords.

The problem with that argument is that houses have generic hitpoints. Any damage contributes to its destruction. So if the starter sword can do damage and can be found cheaply on a utility vendor, it can be used to destroy a house.

I don't see them saying that you cant attack a house with a sword, just that it wont do damage.

Presume that a house can soak certain damage types, those being slashing and piercing. In order to use piercing or slashing to damage a house you would have to put more force behind the object than a character can provide, resulting in your weapons not doing anything to the structure hitpoints.

Now say that houses are weak against blunt damage, the weight of the weapon combined with the strength of the character is enough force to do worthwhile damage to the structure hitpoints even if it is in a low amount.

You misunderstand. The difference between 1 damage and 30 is massive. People will still want to, and need to, buy weapons that are effective. Especially since I also suggested massive durability losses.

300 short swords might barely compare to a single sledgehammer, not to mention, it would take 30 times as long to take a house down.

The difference is not as massive as you think. It is more cost and time effective to use the vendor sword than use a special tool right now. You have to swing more but those swings arent stamina intensive so you can almost spam it. Also the resources required to make a weapon that can last from the time you begin till the house is destroyed would be better spent buying more expendable shortswords.

[Mycke]

This thread as inspired me to make a sig...

(though banana guy was a close 2nd)

[Goldblum]

Originally Posted by Henrik Nystrom

Guys, its suposed to be that only enough damage and right type of damage is actually doing damage on structures, as in option 2 is pretty much what it is today.
If you find other data not following option 2 then please submit that feedback so we can balance it. Cause option 2 is what it is or suposed to be at the moment.

I did submit house punching and newbie swords as feedback here:

http://www.mortalonline.com/forums/4...-feedback.html

also fix blunt weapons in general

[Electrum]

Originally Posted by sCouraGe

The problem with that argument is that houses have generic hitpoints. Any damage contributes to its destruction. So if the starter sword can do damage and can be found cheaply on a utility vendor, it can be used to destroy a house.

I don't see them saying that you cant attack a house with a sword, just that it wont do damage.

Presume that a house can soak certain damage types, those being slashing and piercing. In order to use piercing or slashing to damage a house you would have to put more force behind the object than a character can provide, resulting in your weapons not doing anything to the structure hitpoints.

Now say that houses are weak against blunt damage, the weight of the weapon combined with the strength of the character is enough force to do worthwhile damage to the structure hitpoints even if it is in a low amount.

You seem to be misrepresenting my argument. The flaw you are pointing out is exactly how I am suggesting it should work. I've already explained why.

The difference is not as massive as you think. It is more cost and time effective to use the vendor sword than use a special tool right now. You have to swing more but those swings arent stamina intensive so you can almost spam it. Also the resources required to make a weapon that can last from the time you begin till the house is destroyed would be better spent buying more expendable shortswords.

My numbers were an example completely off the top of my head. My opinion is clear and is not based on the imbalances listed above.

[ellisDwilder]

Hahahaha, you guys are funny, and are making a huge deal out of the laws of houses.

First off i think houses are supposed to be more or less sieged, with the siege weapons not yet implimented. Either make houses permanent until siege engines enter the fray or

Why can you chop a house down with a sword? i bet i coud do it in just a few hours in real life. i dont care if you used old growth wood (which you cant even drive 16d nails through), or the crappy new 1/3 of what you bought isnt here, soft ass new growth pine wood. or stone for that matter. Gravity is what brings a house down, not the tools you use.

Lets say Mo is real life...... just for this topic. Give me 2 hours (even less with a proper tool) to remove the fasteners from the walls holding the roof on and the shit would colapse. It would be pretty dangerous work but i will make your cookie crumble in no time. the roof is what holds the walls together they too would fall.... leaving you debris and a stone slab