Battle System Thought (Just Throwin' Ideas Out)

[Sur Realis]

The recent discussion on WSay just now gave me an idea, slightly in regards to an Archer class, but can be fairly interesting otherwise. My arguement was that I don't really care for archers in any game unless it's a grid-based battle system, which is generally the only thing that causes distance to play a role in the game. (IE: Final Fantasy Tactics, Shining Force, Phantom Brave, etc..) However, I don't expect to see a grid-based battle system in HG, and don't want it because then battles would take too damn long and people would get pissed and leave forever. Yea...

So, on a different thought, is a more advanced version of most Final Fantasy's use of Front or Back. With enemies being placed randomly on the battle screen, all over the place, it kinda loses meaning because they just pop up somewhere random; exception being with Kaug, of course. However, my thought was that the further back the enemy, different things can happen. For one, the further back it is the less damage it recieves, of course, but an archer could specifically pierce through that barrier and damage the same as ever; quid per quo, it also deals less damage of course. An interesting exception to this would be projectile based attacks, example being the latest one I posted of Thieves in the New Skills thread, which would be made to specifically deal normal damage to further back enemies.

This doesn't have to just be based on physical attacking, of course. The further back the enemy the less efficient the magic is for [insert random slightly cliched but not overused reason.] This would cause a possibility in the chaotics having somewhat of an instinctual strategy rather than running in, banner flying, sword drawn, in all their flaming glory. This also brings up possibilities in boss fights as well, with more strategization required; if Gry decided to be up in front and in everyone's faces, he would be more likely to eat you so you would want to bash his... nose-mouth-thingy in as fast as possible, but if he's far back, then you can take your time and prepare for a long winded battle; even more that an enemy could stay in the back, all safe and sound, buff themselves up, then move to the front and raise hell.

/two cents.

[Kyou]

This would shed new light on Jump, Aurabolt, Lock, Weak, Rush Attack. As well as bringing up new skill possibilities.

I disagree with the magic thing though, it should always be constant, never gaining strength based on distance nor losing it.

[Zaiyu]

I approve of your idea Shane, but magic is magic. It's going to do just as much up close as it will way back.

This could be really fun to see.

[lordphoenix]

This idea has been thrown out to some extent before, but never thought out this well. I would add one thing to it, were it implemented. Give attacks the suikoden treatment, meaning that back row characters could only hit the furthest front ranks of enemies, and front row characters the first couple of ranks, with melee weapons. Magic and long range weapons would ignore such rules, of course. As your fighters cut down the front ranks, they have attacking access to foes that are further back in the field. It adds a whole new level of play strategy, where enemies bound by the same restrictions. Arrows flying at that enemy mage in the back as he flings spells at the fighters who must cut down the golems guarding him before they can do anything else attack wise, as your offensive mage helps them dispatch the physically resistant enemy shields, or perhaps aims to clear out the mid ranks or back rows. It's a pretty exciting concept.

[Solemn]

Would this not pose a serious problem for people without a variety party? I have a fighter in ToTe and I know I titan alone can kick some serious ass, especially if I'm alone. But to limit a melee character to only the first few, wouldn't your character have to move forward as he killed them? Otherwise it would be pointless, just removing the monsters, their still too far to hit by the rules, yet you can't very well make them unable to be hit. Sounds to me like such a battle system would gain more of a tactics or a lunar feel to it. As well as causing a serious problem with not having a well balanced party with you at all times, and as above mentioned, dragging out the battles horribly longer if you've got to move across the battlefield just to kill one weak mob who decided to slow you down to begin with. Just my opinion, but I'm not a fan. Interesting as it may be.

[Sur Realis]

Er, I think you missed a bit of it. There still is no Move function. You are still frozen to the area. The difference is that the enemies up front and personally close to you (such as how Kaug is set up) take more damage and deal more damage.

Not to mention if such a function were to be implimented, most certainly all classes would have -some- skill, MP taxing or not, to attack enemies behind others before cutting down the front enemies.

The idea behind this system would add a depth of distance - mages in the back, melees in the front as always, yet with still a level of play that more or less equals out in the end. Like I said, there is no moving, the battle screen would look the same, but attacking the very front column (Kaug) would deal more damage than attacking the very back column, and same for the enemies. Overall, this idea was something that would give Archers a depth rather than ZOMG LULZ ARROWZ.