[MUD-Dev] Better Combat

[David Kennerly]

John Buehler wrote:

> My metric is every 3 seconds during an 'intense' activity.
> Certainly less frequent control during other times.

I like what you've described.  As far as pure timing goes, 3 seconds
is similar to or even faster than many roles of combat in MMPs.  For
instance, when I play a midlevel priest in Dark Ages, I heal and
buff/debuff significantly less often, on average, than once each 3
seconds.

Yet I can see how you would like someone to design a game that
delegates low-level decision making.  For instance, maybe a player
does not command heal or buff/debuff explicitly, but only selecting
a preference, such as ordering the options "buff the team", "protect
myself", "debuff the enemy".

Final Fantasy Tactics had something like this, but not as
high-level, or infinitely diverse, as you hope for.  Although even
that is higher-level than Final Fantasy XI.  Yet it was a team
management game.  Shattered Galaxies manages many units so is also,
necessarily, higher level management, but its higher-level
management of multiple units does not encourage socialization more.
As far as I can tell.  Maybe it would with only one unit to control.
Or would it just be dull?

> And this is also an example of designers not knowing what's going
> to happen.  They just give the players some tools to find
> entertainment.  They don't say how the tools fit into the game.

*scratches his head* Are you talking about a dynamical system?
Since it is a computer game, there must be something somewhere that
ensures that these "improvisation" cases do happen, instead of a
software crash happening.  And that something somewhere requires
specification.

For it to be a wise design choice, it also has to be more efficient
than a non-"improvised" solution.  Sorry to quote, "improvisation"
but used, I can't make heads or tails of it.  Is the computer
improvising?  Are the players?  If the computer is "improvising",
what system defines its method?  Does the computer use short-form or
long-form improvisation, Whose Line is it Anyway or Second City
style?  :)

> Conceivably, those presets could be specific to a number of
> opponent types - or even specific to an opponent: NEVER run from a
> bear.

With well-chosen preset management system, I speculate this would be
fun.  While it is yet more overhead, I think it augments the rest of
what you wrote.

> It was meant to imply it.  It doesn't guarantee it, but I believe
> that when players are not obligated to do something by the game,
> they'll look at their remaining entertainment choices and
> voluntarily engage in one or more.

So it doesn't impede socialization, which is shade different from a
design that encourages socialization.  But anyway, I'm splitting
hairs.  I agree that I would socialize more and I suspect many
others players would, too.

> When the players expect to create bead necklaces, sure.  The
> marketing has to avoid walking into the trap of promising hero
> status,

Sure.  Yet, how large would you guess the market is for players who
want to pay a monthly fee to not accumulate status?  Even most
standalone games have a save game feature.  Even fighting games,
when ported to console, implement methods to accumulate status, such
as missions in SoulCalibur on the DreamCast.

David
_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev