Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Love your work, thanks for this great mod!
The biggest problem that I'm running into is that no RimWorld combat system is capable of simulating reach: as far as the game is concerned, a dory is the same weapon as a sarissa, despite the latter conquering the world. Yes, you can fake it by adding a verb to a melee weapon with Vanilla Expanded Framework's MVCF, but it's still using Shooting skill and doesn't interact with VCF's excellent parrying system.
Reach should not only allow polearms to attack across multiple tiles in melee, but it should determine who strikes first in a bout between, for example, two swords of unequal length that otherwise have the same reach rounded off to the nearest tile. Ideally, this first strike factor should be a composite with Melee skill, so that it's not simply a matter of having the longest weapon, but also how well the pawn can use it.
An adult human male has an arm reach of perhaps 0.7 m with a fist and his stance could account for an additional 0.3 m; if 1 tile = 1 meter, an unarmed reach of 1 – possibly set on the race and modified by body size – is anatomically sound. However, RW's melee combat operates with an inherent reach of √2 to be able to hit all adjacent tiles. It's probably best to preserve this mechanic, as rounding off the diagonal corners for light weapons wouldn't make for particularly interesting gameplay. So, any reach total under √2 would see no change from vanilla.
Handled weapons with discrete blade lengths would be the easiest reach values to determine. If reach needs to be greater or equal to tile distance to attack, then the vast majority of swords would not behave any differently than they currently do, which is sensible. That remains true until the advent of the medieval longsword (the base game “longsword” actually representing an arming sword) with a blade potential of 1.1 m. Combined with a racial reach of 1, that would be enough to attack 2 tiles directly to the front, back, or sides of the pawn. The final progression of the sword lineage, the zweihänder, would only pick up the 2 tiles adjacent to each of the previous at the maximum blade length of 1.8 m.
The reach on polearms would require a bit more subjective touch, since the shaft can't be gripped at the extreme end, especially with one hand. It could make sense to take half of the racial reach or to subtract the arm reach, I'd have to run some numbers. Center of gravity may play a part. My point here is that there's probably no good way to generate item reach values on the fly and VCF probably doesn't want to get into the business of patching every melee weapon in the game. My thought would be to patch vanilla, but expose a custom stat to mod authors that they can set on their own, similar to AM_GrappleRadius from Melee Animations or MuzzleFlash.MuzzleFlashProps. Without it, weapons revert to vanilla behavior.
Certain weapons ought also to have a min reach where they can't strike something that gets too close, but that's likely an option toggle for players running Simple Sidearms or Pocket Sand, since that's exactly how it would've worked in real life. I have more thoughts along these lines, like allowing poles to brace in one direction and applying a speed × body size damage modifier surprise attack to anything that gets within reach, but that's probably enough writing for now. If I can help in any way, let me know – VCR is criminally underrated and I see no reason to reinvent the wheel here.