[MUD-Dev] A flamewar startingpoint.)

[Derrick Jones]

On Sat, 22 Nov 1997, Marian Griffith wrote:

> On Fri 21 Nov, Jon A. Lambert wrote:
> 
> > This seems to be the biggest area of difficulty.  I wish to avoid the
> > arcade-like quality to combat (fastest reflexes win), add a more 
> > thoughtful approach (cf. JCL's combat scripts), yet preserve a sense
> > of urgency (a time limit on decisions) without imposing excessive lag
> > on players.
> 
> I have been thinking on this. The idea to have to code to be playing the
> game does not appeal to me, and I think is excessive trouble.  Currently
> combat is handled very poorly in my opinion.  Why not try to find a mid-
> dle ground? E.g. there exist a variety of attack and defense patterns. A
> player must choose which of those his character will attempt,  of course
> to the best of its abilities. If you don't say anything at all your cha-
> will fight mostly defensive and try only the most obvious of openings in
> its opponent's attacks.

Yes, my current plan is to put standard responses to standard attacks into
a menu format for players to toy with at their leisure.  One of the
problems I am anticipating is that I don't want the player to feel that
they need detailed knowledge of the character's profession.  How would
'Judy' (player) know the best way to have her character Stormrider react
to an opponent attempting to disarm her?  If the code is well-researched,
she could always hunt down a book on fencing (probably the closest thing
to swordplay she'll find in the local library), and find the best course
of action, but most players like to think that their character would react
according to its best interest, with a knowledge base in accordance with
the character's abilities.

Another approach I am still concidering is allowing players to control the
general flow of combat, while the actual thrusts and parries are handled
by the code.  Perhaps allowing players to specify how much attention is
paid to attack/defence, or perhaps setting combat goals like kill, cause
pain, immobilize, wound, capture, etc.  Once the player determines what
the character will do, the code will determine how the character would go
about accomplishing this, based on the intentions/abilities of the players
involved.  Of course I'd still allow players to control real-time action
by taking over combat by calling upon specific skills, but the details of
those skills would be mainly handled by the code.

Most magic systems already work this way, mainly because there's no reason
to suspect that a player knows anything about how to go about casting a
spell.  Players simply determine the desired result (cast web at Boffo),
and the rest is left up to the code (how the spell is cast, where to place
the web to have a chance at catching Boffo, Boffo's ability to avoid being
caught, etc).

I guess the level of control demanded by players is determined by the
priority placed upon the action.  If most players spend 90% of their
on-line time exchanging swordblows, then they won't mind the awkwardness
of controlling combat blow-by-blow, finding that the 'work' they put into
honing their(the players) skills will be rewarded.

> I think that the combat descriptions should focus more
> on the attack and defense patterns than on the force of the blow like it
> is now. E.g. "The black knight aims for your left arm. You can block the
> blow with your shield but your arm is getting heavy."  rather than  "The
> black knight annihilates you with his sword."
> 
nod.  I've always wondered how I could be 'liquified' 30 times and still
standing on my feet.  Or that I even had feet after that.  Many muds use
very poor verbs in their combat descriptions.  Mostly this comes from very
high number of 'hits' with each one doing neglible damage.  Perhaps maybe
expanding the notion of 'hit' to include different effects (Not all
sucessful attacks do direct physical damage, but serve to weaken the
victim.).  For example, maybe a 'hit' with a club just slows the reaction
time of the recipient, or an arrow damages armor, etc.  Here you get into
realistic strengths, where you have to ask yourself "Now what's the chance
I'm only going to get 'nicked' by a battle-axe?"

Gunther