Modification to ship sailing orders.

[Doug R.]

Songthrush, you spend a great deal of time in this thread suggesting that people are not reading what you're writing, and yet you obviously haven't read what I wrote yourself. I never said that I supported removing the docking issue, and I challenge you to find that in my post.

This is what I said:

My Conclusion:

...I suggest that this suggestion be rejected, and Songthrush spend his energy on trying to implement a restraint system, which would solve this very specific problem and also stand on its own merit.

I clearly said that my conclusion is to implement a method of character restraint. I oppose removing the docking issue for exactly the reasons you cited.

And please stop editing your posts. I makes it bloody hard to have a conversation not knowing if what I'm replying to is still the same as what I just read.

[Songthrush]

In your admirable post, Doug, you write:

Making time-limited movement uncancellable does not make any sense outside the context of the problem it's trying to solve, i.e. if the stated problem did not exist, there is absolutely no reason why a ship should somehow be magically unsteerable for up to 3 turns.

This is where I derive my own analysis of what you are saying. I see I was wrong! I am amazed that you obstinately continue to support the exploitation of a bug in the game, available only for Player B. I do not like your attempt to stall this suggestion by reframing it as part of some "larger issue". As I explained, what's possible for Player B should be equally possible for Player A. There is no larger issue, as far as this simple suggestion is concerned.

As for your strange conclusion, based on a type of logic in which I am not schooled, I am sorry, Doug. Although I would like to do so, I will not implement a restraint system for you. After all, this is not the forum for "how should Songthrush spend his time and energies" suggestions.

Putting our sailing modification in action, on the other hand, likely requires three lines of code, if that. Once this is done, I promise to you I will cease editing my posts, adding clarifications and devising simple arguments to show everyone the untenability of your very amusing position that bug exploitation is to be considered a force for good in Cantr.

[Doug R.]

First, it is not a bug, it's a feature. It's a feature meant to prevent unending docking/undocking wars during the same hour, so your conclusion that it is a bug is simply false.

Second, replacing dubious features with dubious features is not a good use of the programming department's time, and the programming department already rejected this suggestion on or around the third post in this thread, only to have it resurrected by an unknown party.

Third, having a method to bind/secure/incapacitate characters would solve this problem, as captors would bind people before bringing them aboard. Captors without the appropriate binding tools would have to deal with the consequences. Being able to bind stands on its own merit, and is not a fudge like your suggestion is.

I'm through with this thread. I've said all I wanted to say.

[marol]

• In situation when two or more characters want to make different orders, the strongest one should decide,
• Health status should be applied,
• When two or more characters' orders are the same, their strength should be cumulated.

[Doug R.]

That's a very reasonable and good solution to this issue, and it's fair and realistic. It also stands on its own merit, because it can be applied to many situations in the game, not just his one.

[Pilot]

This is a special broadcast going out to Songthrush and all those who are in the same special boat as Songthrush. 8)

*Doomph*

(That was the sound of the suggestion hitting the floor after dying)

[Piscator]

That's not exactly de-escalating the situation.

I'm much in favor of marols idea. Sounds very Cantr-like somehow. I've also thought about making steering a project. You would have to drag a person from the rudder first, if you wanted to change the course.

[UloDeTero]

Having read through the whole thread, these are my thoughts on the subject.

I agree that unrealistic and unproductive phenomena like 'docking/undocking wars' should be resolved as soon as possible. However, I don't think the suggested method is the best one. I think the best solution is two-fold:

(1) Restraints.
Characters should be able to restrain each other. Now, characters can be locked in rooms or vehicles, with very little chance of escape. That's 'bad' from the POV of the prisoner but 'good' from the POV of the guard. In fact, good or bad is relative depending on who's locked up and who's doing the locking. In short, restraints could be used for good or for bad. Which is the way it should be. In practice, it'd probably work like an 'anti-key', blocking access to doors and paths and disabling all actions except speaking. Or, it could work as an invisible, locked vehicle. *shrugs* I don't the technicalities, but those are my ideas of how it could work.

(2) Ship crews.
Tiamo made a very good suggestion that seems to have been overlooked. Larger boats should require a larger crew to actually operate and sail them. This would probably work best as a project. Whoever initiates the project acts as the 'captain' and can decide the heading, speed, etc. If possible, this could be changed by the captain from within the Project page. All crew would simply have to join the project to 'register their participation' in the sailing project. If at any point they decide not to obey orders, they simply 'cancel their participation' in the project.
Docking or undocking would be an extension of this (either as a separate project or integrated into the Sailing project). In other words, all the crew - or at least a necessary number - need to work together.

An interesting side-possibility is that the number of working crew could affect the speed. For example, if a large ship needs 5 crew but only has 4, it could only move at, say, 80% capacity (4 / 5). Therefore a fully-manned ship could easily outrun a ship with a smaller crew (that is, a ship of the same type). Taking that further, it would be possible (and should be possible) for a small but well-staffed ship to catch up to a stolen galleon, assuming the thief is working alone.

Note that it's not just the number of people aboard that counts. It's the number of people on board who're working together, following the captain's orders. Note too, that in theory anyone on board could set up a Sailing project (and be in charge of the ship), but there could only be one being completed at any one time. The 'winning' project would of course be the one with the most supporters (ie, whichever has the most participants). This allows the possibility of mutinies.

In one-man boats, there's only one man who could make a Sailing project. In two-man boats, if there's any disagreement then the strongest (or unrestrained) man sails the boat alone. It may seem a little unfair, but there's no reason why the weakest of two men should have any chance to change the course. His only chance would be to attack the other guy or try to reason with him.

*looks over the post* Yeah, that'll do, I think.

[sanchez]

I like Piscator's steering project, as dragging from a project entails marol's strength and health suggestion. Currently, if you're fighting for control of a boat, you can hide in a cabin or docked-docked boat until just before the tick, but then someone must go adeck for the boat to move. If your enemy's adeck, too, it's still going to come down to who's fastest to the tick and who has the largest crew. In a one-on-one battle, it's a bigger difference, as a single person drag is tough. The problem I see with this is the same problem already making sea battles too difficult and that's lag, which occurs at ticks. Training a crew to be awake at boat movement ticks is challenging enough, but lag makes it nearly impossible sometimes.
Cantr battles involve timing, and it's going to take something a lot more interesting and involved than restraints to alter that. Build a cabin. I don't see a real need for change here.

[Songthrush]

Marol, are you prepared to implement your very interesting suggestion in a speedy way?

I did not realize that conflicting orders could be compared and decided upon by the server without a lot of extra strain, but the idea is great!

What I hope is clear to everyone (excepting Doug.R.) by now, is that if we have a situation where Player A and Player B are trying to achieve different ends, the game must not arbitrarily always favour Player B.

That, unfortunately, is the situation with unstoppable-docking near cities immediately after undocking, and it cannot be said that cabins, restraints or any other extras are the solution to that serious issue.

The entire situation is easily seen to be an unintended flaw in the code, despite what Doug R. maintains. The current docking restriction was put in place to avoid unnecessary reset-battles on ships out at sea. It did not properly consider the situation when the ship has only just UNdocked, otherwise it would not have so blatantly favoured only Player B, whose orders are permanently not cancellable.

[Songthrush]

In this appendix, I present a true story that has happened with one of my characters. The names have been altered to protect the innocent. These events, I hope, will show even the most pirate-phobic among you that beyond doubt a serious issue exists.

Justin is a high seas trader. Garglemog is a disgruntled city leader. This is the log of their altercation, after Justin rejects Garglemog's conditions and decides to peacefully leave the city in his ship.

Justin undocks from City of Gargle, setting sail toward the horizon.
Garglemog, who is an even more active player than Justin, boards a dinghy and quickly docks to Justin.
Garglemog attacks Justin and begins to break Justin's ship lock.
Justin attacks Garglemog back.
Justin's lock is broken, Garglemog boards Justin's ship (exactly 1ms after the server tick showing his unflinching dedication to the type of roleplaying Doug R. also values), and begins an unstoppable, uncancellable, utterly dismaying docking sequence back to his city.

As you can see here, no pirates or ruffians of any kind were involved. And yet, will no one say a word for poor Justin? If you think about it, when Garglemog attacked Justin, Justin had a chance to attack back. When Garglemog broke the lock on Justin's ship, Justin had a chance to break the lock on Garglemog's. But when Garglemog boarded to start docking, what chances did Justin get? None. His movement order (put in place HOURS AGO!) is immediately and permanently cancelled. He was now, inexplicably, completely in Garglemog's power, without any chance to fight the ship docking order.

Please, let's not be hasty to advise Justin to sail in a Galleon full of cabins, and preferably with a crew of 5 active cutthroats. He sails a little self-built longboat.

[Money]

marol suggestion is the one who gets my support