[MUD-Dev] Better Combat

[Eric Random]

--- Byron Ellacott <bje at apnic.net> wrote:
> David Kennerly wrote:

>> I'm assuming these are quasi-D&D derivatives.  If so, then being
>> offensive IS a risk-averse strategy when in a team.  And even as
>> a solo character, a high-offense is more efficient than a
>> high-defense character.  It seems counterintuitive, but in D&D
>> derivatives, the usual victory condition is reducing the opponent
>> to 0 or less hit points.  No amount of defense will do that.

> For that matter, I've yet to find a game featuring combat in which
> defense is the better strategy.  I can't find the quote, but I
> believe Sun Tzu's Art of War agrees with me here.

....

> (If someone has a counterexample, I would love to hear it!)

Concerning offense v. defense, I've experimented on a few battle
systems over the years that were movement based and focused on
offense vs. defense, among other things. In this light, it's
important to define what offense and defense means in the context of
these systems.  Offense was focused on entering the opponent's field
of influence, where defense was focused on the opponent entering
your field of influence. In this context, either offense or defense
movements could result in damage to your opponent.

In offensive mode, you are focused on determining the best way to
attack your opponent (when to strike, where to strike, what kind of
strike, how hard, how fast, etc.), and less on how to defend
yourself.  Therefore, in offensive mode, you have a bonus to
offense, and a penalty to defense, especially while attacking.

In defensive mode, it's just the opposite. You are trying to
determine your opponent's attack (when, where, what, how, etc.), and
less on how to attack them. Therefore, in defensive mode, you have a
bonus to defense, and a penalty to offense.

Further, some defensive movements can incur damage on the attacker,
which is simply an attack against an opponent within your field of
influence (ie. attacking an opponent based on your opponent's attack
against you). Many martial arts have movements based on this
principle (making an opponent's attack work against him).

Coupled with fatigue being incurred per movement, and basic fatigue
costs for attacks > block attacks > blocks, decision making between
offense and defense becomes fatigue management, both on an
individual level, and on a shared group/party level as well. To
clarify, fatigue is inversely proportional to the effectiveness of
movements, as well as other things.

Placing this system in a MUD context, offense and defense strategies
are determined based on you (and your party's) strengths/weaknesses
versus your opponents' strengths/weaknesses.

Offensive strategies are good for:

  Fighting opponents with weaker defenses

  Fighting opponents with weaker offenses

  Finishing off a weakened opponent

  Fighting multiple weaker opponents

  Your off capability is much greater than your def capability

  Opponent is in a determined defensive state

  Party has weaker offensive but stronger defensive capability

  Attempting to focus the attention of your opponent upon you

  Testing your opponents defensive capability

  Have strong passive defenses (plate armor, shielding, etc.)

  Temporary weakness in stronger opponent (blinding, slowing)

Defensive strategies are good for:

  Fighting opponents with a stronger offense Fighting opponents with
  a stronger defense

  Fighting multiple opponents with collectively stronger offense

  Defensive maneuvers are more damaging than offensive maneuvers

  Fatiguing your opponent

  Party has greater offensive but weaker defensive capability

  Holding ground (party flees,is protected, or comes to rescue)

  Biding time to consider options (flee, switch weapons, etc.)

  Waiting for timed effects (poison, bleeding, delayed magic)

  Waiting for effects to wear out (blinding, slowing, rooting)

  Reduce your fatigue while party becomes more offensive

  Attempting to reduce focus of opponents attention on you

  Testing your opponent's offensive capability

  Have weak passive defenses (cloth, naked, skins, debuffs, etc.)

There's a -lot- of other factors involved in these systems, but this
post is more centered on offense vs. defense and their strategies.
Fatigue is an important inclusion since offense and defense
strategies lend toward greater fatigue management.

One interesting side effect of this perspective is that it allows
greater freedom for characters to face off against much tougher
opponents in group settings by having weaker passive members focus
on defense and weak flanking members to focus on offense when
opponents are outnumbered. This could allow a greater range of
expertise within groups (eg. low levels mixed with high
levels). Throughout the battle, members could switch between
strategies to share burdens dependent on their current relative
weaknesses and strengths. To some degree, this perspective is
already utilized in higher player strategies within some
MUDs/MMORPGs today. This perspective just allows the player
increased control over it, and may also be, to some degree, what
previous posts were getting at as well.

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