Improved fighting.

[griogal]

The idea of improving battle skills with experience is good, but it has one MAJOR problem...it encourages violence.

Some who want really good warrior types can walk around like killing machines attacking everyone they see just to gain experience...and that really wouldn't be good.

(I would - in the future - like to see armor, like chainmail and leather vests, that works like the shields do now...)

There should be other ways to improve your fighting than just walking around and killing simple peasants. Not much of real combat experience. In fact experience should only be able to improve your abilities if you fight an equal or stronger opponent. Training (i.e. not actually beating each other to death) should also be made possible. This would give the town guards and army soldiers something to do which is more appropiate for their profession.

[Pirog]

I really like ephirolls idea.
By making the experience levels take a lot of time only dedicated warriors will have the energy to train.

This would - like griogal pointed out - give the town guards something to do. Guard duty is almost meaningless in it's current state...but with a combat system like the one ephiroll suggested the training soldiers would need to be fed and looked after while in training, and THAT was about the sole purpose of the medieval nobility.

[nateflory]

Edit, my suggestion is from an ealier post in this thread, not the more recent ones... quoted below...

I think it was meant as
You can still only hit once per day but if you get hit back {animal or people} your allowed to hit again whatever just hit you back.
So people logged off would be protected under the same rules as today.

To drag this out of the depths of time...
I was going to suggest this very thing, but then noticed it already had been.

What if, when you attack an animal or person, if they attack back within the same day, you get another chance to attack?
This would of course keep the rules generally how they are now, and protect idle characters from being repeatedly smacked, but would allow 'duels' between characters to be played out over the course of a day rather than a week.

I know of one situation where it would have allowed for fairly dramatic RP, instead of two characters posturing threatengly for a day, before landing another blow. And such a system should be 'fair' IMHO, since it would only impact the two characters involved, who would have made a willing choice to strike back, knowing that retaliation was possible.

Or if the animals suddenly attack you, you can strike back ONCE even if you already hunted that type of animal.

(presuming the 'battle history' is saved as a table row, simply delete the row referencing a specific animaltype or person, if that 'being' also attacks you.)

[Doug R.]

I like what this suggestion is trying to accomplish, but I don't like that it's done at the cost of the victim.

Pirate attacks Sleeping Town Leader. A few hours later, Sleeping town leader wakes up and attacks Pirate, meaning STL is open to another attack by Pirate. Pirate attacks STL again, but STL is asleep, so he doesn't attack again that day. Over the course of say, 4 days, STL is attacked 8 times, and the pirate 4. STL of course dies.

Not a good solution if it favors frequent peekers over more casual players. It needs to be fair for everyone.

[nateflory]

Perhaps limiting it to animals then would be more fair?
Animal attacks are not as frequent, and would allow injured people a chance to strike back. True, it would allow for a couple of extra kills over the long run, but are more large/small bones really that bad?

[Sicofonte]

In fact experience should only be able to improve your abilities if you fight an equal or stronger opponent.

That's not true in real life. My kick boxing sensei has been beating his trainees along the past 15 years and he is stronger every day.

[Hellzon]

Pirate attacks Sleeping Town Leader. A few hours later, Sleeping town leader wakes up and attacks Pirate, meaning STL is open to another attack by Pirate. Pirate attacks STL again, but STL is asleep, so he doesn't attack again that day. Over the course of say, 4 days, STL is attacked 8 times, and the pirate 4. STL of course dies.

Not a good solution if it favors frequent peekers over more casual players. It needs to be fair for everyone.

I agree. So the solution would be to have a setting for automatic retalitation? In your example:
Pirate attacks Sleeping Town Leader, who is set to retaliate automatically, and thus counterattacks. Pirate is also set to counterattack automatically and attacks STL. When STL wakes up, he smacks Pirate, but Pirate doesn't hit back since he's done his counterattack on STL within the last 8 hours. Total of 2 attacks per char and day.

Of course, Jos doen't like automation, and this would likely be murder on the server. (Or would it? I suppose there is a list of "who has attacked who". Just make one for "who has counterattacked who", right?)

/Hellzon - makes no sense

[Doug R.]

Restrictive combat is simply the way a "turn" based game has to be played. I don't think there is any way to make it better other than coding a completely new real-time dueling mechanism outside of traditional combat completely, which won't happen, and if it did, would have its own slew of problems.

[Pie]

Ok.......

I have to say, I like this idea. The idea that if you attack, and then if your victem retaliates, than you can attack him again, it's pretty good. It would change cantr fighting systems into a more real-time thing, rather than a slow moving thingy.

as for giving advantages to the people with more time on theyr hands... so what? In cantr, it has always been that way. if you check your caracters more, than you will be able to change your projects when one is finished quicker, allowing for less wasted time. Such is the same in the current attacking system. Curently, a pirat can just go into the town, attack everybody, and then go back into theyr ship. now, lets say bob is one of the persons who is attacked. He is playing the game when he is attacked, and when he is attacked, he imediatly retaliates(not by automation). So who cares if this is giving someone an advantage becous of theyr time zone or somthing els, becous there alredy is that advantage. Theres nothing we can do about it.Its called warfair, and there are many arts of warfair playing apon different advantages given to peoples.

[Doug R.]

So who cares if this is giving someone an advantage becous of theyr time zone or somthing els, becous there alredy is that advantage. Theres nothing we can do about it.Its called warfair, and there are many arts of warfair playing apon different advantages given to peoples.

The advantages as they currently exist are unfortunate and unavoidable, not something to be expanded. If Cantr was meant to be a real-time game, it would be coded as such.

[yigit]

I've searched the suggestions forum, but couldn't find anything similar. I'm not entirely satisfied with what I'm just going to suggest, it doesn't look useful enough to justify the programming effort to me, but I thought it could spark something else in somebody else's mind, so here I go:

How about changing the current restriction from "hit one person once in a day with a power percentage of your choice" to "hit one person as many times in one day as you like, with a power percentage adding up to a maximum of 100"? That would introduce multiple hits to the same target, but wouldn't change the total damage given per day.

As an example, I could decide to hit a character for %10 damage, then %20, and then for a third time with %70 damage, and that would be all for the day. Or I could choose to hit one strong blow at full power. Players more fond of roleplaying could hit for %10, then insult each other, then hit for another %10, maybe try to reach an agreement, and upon failure continue hitting each other for the ramining of the day.

If something like this was implemented, it would maybe allow some rping during fights. It wouldn't change the fighting speed though, it would still take 3 days for a character to kill another. Personally, I find the fact that fights take three days much less disturbing than the way fights are done: with long, one-day pauses between hits.

As I said, I don't see this suggestion anywhere near being complete, but it could be improved.

[Marian]

I don't like the automatic thing, because just if someone hits you it doesn't always mean you want to hit back, maybe your a pacifist or maybe you just don't want to tire yourself out over a worthless newspawn.

[Doug R.]

yigit's suggestion has merit, and it has non-roleplaying applications as well:

1: Slapping can be done infinitely

2: Authorities could give thieves "warning" hits without losing their full attack for the day.

3: Attacks could be drawn out in order to average out the damage done, so instead of missing in one attack, you could do three, and at least guarantee yourself some damage that day.

There are many roleplaying benefits also.

[nateflory]

I actually really like the suggestion there, regarding attacking up to a total of 100%. The benefit would be, as mentioned, that pirates, suicidal charries, and warmongers could hit for the max 100% and run, but a roleplayed duel could go on for a few hits each day, to keep things interesting.

[MrPenguin589]

Yes! Excellent idea, yigit! In my opinion, that is way better than any other of the improved fighting suggestions. It has what everyone wants... I think.